Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2025-12-08
Planning and Development Committee Post Agenda Date:December 8, 2025 Time:5:00 p.m. Location: Council Chambers or Electronic Participation Municipal Administrative Centre 40 Temperance Street, 2nd Floor Bowmanville, Ontario Inquiries and Accommodations: For inquiries about this agenda, or to make arrangements for accessibility accommodations for persons attending, please contact: Laura Preston, Temporary Committee Coordinator, at 905-623-3379, ext. 2106 or by email at lpreston@clarington.net. Alternate Format: If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator, at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131. Collection, Use and Disclosure of Personal Information: If you make a delegation, or presentation, at a Committee or Council meeting, the Municipality will be recording you and will make the recording public on the Municipality’s website, www.clarington.net/calendar. Written and oral submissions which include home addresses, phone numbers, and email addresses become part of the public record. If you have any questions about the collection of information, please contact the Municipal Clerk. Cell Phones: Please ensure all cell phones, mobile and other electronic devices are turned off or placed on non-audible mode during the meeting. Copies of Reports are available at www.clarington.net/archive The Revised Agenda will be published on Wednesday after 12:00 p.m. Late items added or a change to an item will appear with a * beside them. Pages 1.Call to Order 2.Land Acknowledgment Statement 3.Declaration of Interest 4.Announcements 5.Presentations/Delegations *5.1 Delegation by Mitch Morawetz Regarding a Request to Refer Report PDS-066-25 - Courtice Transit-Oriented Community Secondary Plan Recommendation Report to Staff 4 *5.2 Delegation by Sarto Provenzano Regarding Report PDS-073-25 - Bill 60: Fighting Delays, Building Faster Act, 2025 and Provincial Consultation on Simplifying and Standardizing Official Plans - Comments 16 6.Consent Agenda *6.1 PDS-066-25 - Courtice Transit-Oriented Community Secondary Plan Recommendation Report 18 (Attachments 1b and 5 were Revised) 6.2 PDS-067-25 - Intention to Pursue Heritage Designation of 4-10 King Avenue East, Newcastle 220 6.3 PDS-073-25 - Bill 60: Fighting Delays, Building Faster Act, 2025 and Provincial Consultation on Simplifying and Standardizing Official Plans – Comments 231 6.4 FSD-035-25 - 2025 Development Charge Study and Community Benefits Charge Strategy Final Recommendations 249 7.Items for Separate Discussion 8.New Business Planning and Development Committee December 8, 2025 Page 2 9.Public Meetings (6:30 p.m.) 9.1 Public Meeting for an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment 391 Applicant: The Biglieri Group Ltd. Location: 3061 Regional Road 20, Darlington Planner: Jacob Circo, Senior Planner 9.1.1 PDS-068-25 - Applications for Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment to Permit a Commercial Fill Operation at 3061 Regional Road 20 in Clarington 399 9.2 Public Meeting for an Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment and Draft Plan of Subdivision 419 Applicant: The Biglieri Group Ltd. Location: PT Lot 30, Concession 1, Former Township of Darlington, southeast corner of Bloor and Trulls Road, Courtice Planner: Jacob Circo, Senior Planner 9.2.1 PDS-072-25 - Proposal for 370 Residential Units and Ground Floor Retail Space at the Southeast Corner of Bloor Street and Trulls Road in Courtice 433 10.Confidential Items 10.1 LGS-044-25 - OLT Appeal - Stylux Bowmanville Inc. Municipal Act, 2001 Section 239 (2) (e) 11.Adjournment Planning and Development Committee December 8, 2025 Page 3 From:no-reply@clarington.net To:ClerksExternalEmail Subject:New Delegation Request from Morawetz Date:Monday, December 1, 2025 10:30:40 PM EXTERNAL A new delegation request has been submitted online. Below are the responses provided: Subject Comments regarding the Courtice Transit-Oriented Community Secondary Plan Action requested of Council Refer matter to staff for further discussion so that concerns can be addressed prior to Council approval. Date of meeting 12/8/2025 Summarize your delegation Concerned with the limited range of uses within the Business designation recommended for the SE corner of Courtice Road and Baseline Road. Also concerned about the SWM facility symbol on the property. Have you been in contact with staff or a member of Council regarding your matter of interest? Yes Name of the staff member or Councillor. Amanda Crompton Report number (if known) PDS-066-25 Will you be attending this meeting in person or online? In person First name: Mitch Single/Last name Page 4 Morawetz Firm/Organization (if applicable) Planfarm Inc. on behalf of Courtice Baseline Inc. Job title (if applicable) Principal Address Town/Hamlet Orono Postal code Email address: Phone number Do you plan to submit correspondence related to this matter? Yes Do you plan to submit an electronic presentation (i.e. PowerPoint)? If yes, the file must be submitted to the Municipal Clerk’s Department by 2 p.m. on the Friday prior to the meeting date. Yes I acknowledge that the Procedural By-law Permits seven minutes for delegations and five minutes for Public Meeting participants. Yes [This is an automated email notification -- please do not respond] Page 5 Planning and Development Committee December 8, 2025 Planfarm Inc. on behalf of: Courtice Baseline Inc. File Numbers: COPA2025-0005 (PLN 41.7) Courtice Transit- Oriented Community Secondary Plan Courtice Road and Baseline Road Southeast quadrant Page 6 Courtice Transit-Oriented Secondary Plan Planfarm Inc. Site Location and Context Page 7 Courtice Transit-Oriented Secondary Plan Planfarm Inc. Site Location and Context Page 8 Courtice Transit-Oriented Secondary Plan Planfarm Inc. Planning Policy Context Page 9 Courtice Transit-Oriented Secondary Plan Planfarm Inc. Planning Policy Context Page 10 Courtice Transit-Oriented Secondary Plan Planfarm Inc. Zoning Page 11 Courtice Transit-Oriented Secondary Plan Planfarm Inc. Preliminary Development Concept Hotel Four storey (min) Restaurant(s) Two storey (min) Drive-thru Office Space Gas Bar Electric Vehicle Charging High quality landscaping Street facing buildings On-site Stormwater Management Facilities Page 12 Courtice Transit-Oriented Secondary Plan Planfarm Inc. Preliminary Development Concept Page 13 Courtice Transit-Oriented Secondary Plan Planfarm Inc. Preliminary Development Concept Page 14 Courtice Transit-Oriented Secondary Plan Planfarm Inc. Comments or Questions Mitch Morawetz Principal Planfarm Inc. mitch@planfarm.ca Page 15 From:no-reply@clarington.net To:ClerksExternalEmail Subject:New Delegation Request from Provenzano Date:Tuesday, December 2, 2025 10:25:41 PM EXTERNAL A new delegation request has been submitted online. Below are the responses provided: Subject Staff comments on Bill 60 Action requested of Council Acknowledgement Date of meeting 12/8/2025 Summarize your delegation Currently, Minister’s decisions (e.g. on official plans) are required to be consistent with the provincial planning statements and conform to provincial plans. New subsections 3(5.1) and 3(5.2) provide greater authority to the Minister to make other planning decisions to advance provincial priorities without being required to be consistent with provincial planning statements or provincial plans, similar to the flexibility previously granted to Minster’s Zoning Orders (MZOs). Relationship between Bill 60 and Regulated Lands. Have you been in contact with staff or a member of Council regarding your matter of interest? No Will you be attending this meeting in person or online? In person First name: Sarto Single/Last name Provenzano How to pronounce your name: Sartorio Provenzano Page 16 Address Town/Hamlet Courtice Postal code Email address: Phone number Do you plan to submit correspondence related to this matter? No Do you plan to submit an electronic presentation (i.e. PowerPoint)? If yes, the file must be submitted to the Municipal Clerk’s Department by 2 p.m. on the Friday prior to the meeting date. No I acknowledge that the Procedural By-law Permits seven minutes for delegations and five minutes for Public Meeting participants. Yes [This is an automated email notification -- please do not respond] Page 17 Staff Report If this information is required in an alternate accessible format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131. Report To: Planning and Development Committee Date of Meeting: December 8, 2025 Report Number: PDS-066-25 Authored By: Amanda Crompton, Principal Planner Submitted By: Darryl Lyons, Deputy CAO, Planning and Infrastructure Reviewed By: Mary-Anne Dempster, CAO By-law Number: Resolution Number: File Number: COPA2025-0005 (PLN 41.7) Report Subject: Courtice Transit-Oriented Community Secondary Plan Recommendation Report Recommendations: 1. That Report PDS-066-25, and any related delegations or communication items, be received; 2. That Clarington Official Plan Amendment 144 and Durham Region Official Plan Amendment 1, attached to Report PDS-066-25, for the Courtice Transit-Oriented Community Secondary Plan be finalized and forwarded to Council for adoption; 3. That Clarington Official Plan Amendment 144 and Durham Region Official Plan Amendment 1 be forwarded to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing for approval; 4. That upon adoption by Council, the Courtice Transit-Oriented Community Secondary Plan be implemented by Staff as Council’s policy on land use and planning matters and be implemented through the annual capital budgeting process; 5. That the Urban Design and Sustainability Guidelines appended to the Secondary Plan be approved and be used by staff to guide development applications and public projects; 6. That the Deputy CAO, Planning and Infrastructure Services be authorized to finalize the Transportation Impact Study in support of the Secondary Plan; 7. That the Deputy CAO, Planning and Infrastructure Services be authorized to execute any agreements to implement the Secondary Plan once adopted by Council; and 8. That all interested parties listed in Report PDS-066-25 and any delegations be advised of Council’s decision. Page 18 Municipality of Clarington Page 2 Report PDS-066-25 Report Overview 1. Purpose of the Report 1.1 The purpose of this staff report is to recommend that Council adopt Clarington Official Plan Amendment 144 (OPA 144) to include the Courtice Transit-Orient Community Secondary Plan (Secondary Plan) in the Clarington Official Plan. The recommendation follows an extensive public engagement process. OPA 144 includes the Secondary Plan and the associated Urban Design and Sustainability Guidelines (UDSG), provided as Attachment 1 to this report. 1.2 The report also recommends that Council adopt Durham Region Official Plan Amendment 1 (ROPA 1), which removes a portion of the 2051 Urban Expansion Areas overlay and makes minor adjustments to the Courtice Protected Major Transit Station Area (PMTSA) boundary. The Secondary Plan area boundary was slightly expanded to include some lands east of Courtice Road and south of Bloor Street that are designated Community Areas within the 2051 Urban Expansion Areas overlay in the Durham Region Official Plan (ROP). Lands within the 2051 Urban Expansion Areas were added to the Urban Boundary through the latest Regional Municipal Comprehensive Review, Envision Durham, approved by the Province in late 2024 and represent new land within the urban system for the purpose of facilitating development. 1.3 The ROP directs that detailed planning for lands within the 2051 Urban Expansion Areas be done primarily through secondary plans. Expanding the boundary to include these lands (approximately 15 hectares) supports a coordinated approach to planning for residential lands near the future Courtice GO Station. These lands were incorporated and analyzed within the technical studies undertaken as part of the Secondary Plan process to ensure infrastructure is effectively planned to service the expanded area. Page 19 Municipality of Clarington Page 3 Report PDS-066-25 1.4 The urban expansion supports a coordinated approach to planning for residential lands near the future Courtice GO Station. As of January 1, 2025, Envision Durham, the new Regional Official Plan, became part of the Clarington Official Plan. ROPA 1 is included as Attachment 2 to this staff report. 1.5 The Province is the approval authority for OPA 144 as the Secondary Plan establishes policies for a PMTSA. The Province is currently consulting on proposed amendments to the Planning Act, through Bill 60, which would remove the requirement for Ministry approval of official plan policies that identify the authorized lands uses in the PMTSA, provided residential uses would be permitted on all the lands subject to the amendment. Amendments to PMTSA policies related to the people and jobs per hectare minimum target, and minimum densities would continue to be subject to approval by the Minister. 1.6 The Province will also be forwarded ROPA 1 for approval as the amendment slightly modifies the PMTSA boundary to limit its extension east of the Tooley Creek Valley. 1.7 This report includes an overview of the Secondary Plan and summarizes the process and feedback received since the release of the draft Official Plan Amendment, draft Secondary Plan, and draft UDSG in May 2025. 2. Background 2.1 The Secondary Plan is located south of Bloor Street, north of Highway 401, east of Robinson Creek, and west of Tooley Creek and Highway 418, as shown in Figure 1. The Secondary Plan area is almost 400 hectares in size and surrounded by the Southwest Courtice, Southeast Courtice, Courtice Waterfront and Energy Park Secondary Plans. 2.2 The Secondary Plan was originally initiated in 2018 as the Courtice Employment Lands Secondary Plan. The area had been designated for employment uses and was envisioned as a major employment and innovation centre. 2.3 In December 2021, the Region of Durham adopted Regional Official Plan Amendment 186, which delineated seven PMTSAs, including the future Courtice GO Station. At the same time, the Region endorsed employment land conversions within the Secondary Plan area. The vision for the Secondary Plan changed from an employment and innovation centre to a mixed-use, transit-supportive and complete community. 2.4 The Courtice Transit-Oriented Community is envisioned to evolve as a complete, inclusive, and sustainable community that accommodates a diverse population through a mix of housing, employment and community amenities. The arrival of GO Train service to Courtice is a catalyst for higher density development within the Secondary Plan area, accompanied by active commercial streets, community amenities, green spaces and a connected network of streets, trails and transit. Page 20 Municipality of Clarington Page 4 Report PDS-066-25 2.5 Minimum densities for the residential and mixed-use designations are set out in the Secondary Plan to ensure a density of 150 people and jobs per hectare within the PMTSA is achieved over time. The Secondary Plan area is planned to accommodate close to 30,000 residents and a range of jobs for more than 8,000 workers. The density is supported by direct connections to the station that encourage the use of transit for daily trips. 2.6 To meet the needs of a diverse population, the Secondary Plan includes a collection of policies intended to support the Municipality’s housing objectives. Policies in the Secondary Plan strongly encourage the integration of affordable housing, including subsidized non-market housing units. In addition, the Secondary Plan proposes a range of housing forms, sizes and tenures across the community. 2.7 Future residential and mixed-use neighbourhoods will be organized around four primary Neighbourhood Parks and six elementary schools, complemented by a network of smaller parks and parkettes to ensure that most residents are within a short walk of public green space. In addition, a central Special Park will serve as a gathering place and civic destination for all Courtice residents. 2.8 The Statutory Public Meeting Report (PDS-026-25) and Presentation outline the Secondary Plan’s vision, framework, and key policy directions in detail. Page 21 Municipality of Clarington Page 5 Report PDS-066-25 Figure 1: Courtice Transit-Oriented Community Secondary Plan Area 3. Secondary Plan Process 3.1 Development of the Secondary Plan was informed by a comprehensive public engagement program and several technical background studies. 3.2 The Secondary Plan process for the Courtice Transit-Oriented Community involves four phases as described below. A full Sequence of Events is provided in Attachment 3. Phase 1 (Initial Engagement and Analysis) focused on conducting background research and technical analysis to inform the develop ment of three land use options. An initial Public Information Centre was held on June 18, 2019 , and this phase was concluded with a Public Information Centre held on September 29, 2020. Page 22 Municipality of Clarington Page 6 Report PDS-066-25 Phase 2 (Principles and Land Use Option) involved the preparation of land use options illustrating different arrangements of open spaces and land uses. The land use options were shared through multiple engagement events, including a Public Information Centre and a Stakeholder Workshop, both held on March 22, 2022. Phase 3 (Preferred Land Use Plan and Draft Deliverables) resulted in the development of a preferred land use plan and key policy directions. On May 29, 2023, a design workshop was held with the Courtice Transit-Oriented Community Landowner Group. The preferred land use plan and key policy directions were presented at a Public Information Centre on November 6, 2023. Phase 4 (Finalize Deliverables) centered on completing the draft and final Secondary Plan and UDSG. The draft documents were presented at a Statutory Public Meeting on June 19, 2025. In addition, the final technical studies were completed and circulated for review and feedback. 3.3 Public engagement included four Public Information Centres held between June 18, 2019, and November 6, 2023, a Statutory Public Meeting held on June 19, 2025, and landowner workshops held throughout the process. Feedback received over the last several years was used to inform the creation of this Secondary Plan. A more detailed summary of the Secondary Plan process and community engagement program is provided in the Statutory Public Meeting report (PDS-026-25). Page 23 Municipality of Clarington Page 7 Report PDS-066-25 Background Reports 3.4 The technical analysis and recommendations from several background and technical reports informed the preparation of the Secondary Plan. A summary of the following technical reports is provided in Attachment 4 to this report: Stage 1 Summary Report, 2019 Cultural Heritage Assessment Report, 2019 Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment Report, 2019 Transportation Impact Assessment Report, 2019 Servicing Existing Conditions, Opportunities and Constraints Report, 2019 Courtice Employment Lands Secondary Plan: Employment Growth Outlook, 2020 Sustainability Best Practices Report, 2021 Draft Preferred Land Use Plan and Key Policy Directions, 2023 Functional Servicing Report, 2025 3.5 In addition, a draft Transportation Impact Study assessed the proposed transportation network and intersection operations within the study area and provided recommendations to inform future areas of study. Final revisions are being made to the Transportation Impact Study to address comments from the Region and the Municipality. 3.6 A Municipal Class Environmental Assessment (MCEA), which is required for all new or realigned major roads needed to service the Secondary Plan , is being completed using the ‘Integrated Approach’ which jointly satisfies the requirements of the Planning Act and the Environmental Assessment Act. All public notices, communications and review periods have been designed to ensure that they conform to the requirements of both the Planning Act and the Environmental Assessment Act. 3.7 Council adopted the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Subwatershed Study in 2023, and an associated Flood Mitigation Study was completed which refined the flood plain limits in the Secondary Plan area. 3.8 Individual landowners have submitted Environmental Impact Studies (EIS), which provide additional information to support the modification of the Environmental Protection Area (EPA). These refinements to the EPA are incorporated into the Secondary Plan. 4. Public and Agency Submissions and Summaries 4.1 Comments on the draft Secondary Plan were received through oral and written correspondence from agencies, landowners and members of the public. This section summarizes the comments provided since the release of the draft OPA, draft Secondary Plan, and draft UDSG in May 2025. Section 6 outlines how these comments have been addressed. Page 24 Municipality of Clarington Page 8 Report PDS-066-25 4.2 All the comments on the draft Secondary Plan, along with staff responses, are documented in the Public and Agency Comments Summary Tables, included as Attachments 5 and 6 to this report. General Public Comments 4.3 One deputation was made at the Statutory Public Meeting held on June 19, 2025 , raising concerns related to building heights, housing affordability, potential impacts on crime and transportation. Landowner Comments 4.4 Landowners within and adjacent to the Secondary Plan area provided a range of comments, summarized as follows: Confirmation of the precise locations of parks and parkettes, and to provide greater flexibility in the Secondary Plan by using park (“P”) symbols to indicate potential park sites rather than fixed boundaries. A more accurate depiction of local roads south of the rail corridor and north of Baseline Road. Consideration of the classification and alignment of Street E in relation to the road network identified in the Southeast Courtice Secondary Plan to the north. Refinement of the ‘Environmental Protection Area’ boundary at the north west corner of the Secondary Plan area and redesignation to ‘Low Density Residential’, supported by a scoped Environmental Impact Study. Inclusion of a block plan policy for lands south of the rail corridor and north of Baseline Road, between Trulls Road and Courtice Road, to recognize the fine-grain parcel fabric and mixed ownership within the established industrial park. 4.5 The Courtice Transit-Oriented Community Landowner Group also provided comments on the draft Secondary Plan. Staff have worked closely with the Landowner Group throughout the Secondary Plan process and have incorporated revisions where appropriate to address their earlier feedback. Their comments at and following the Statutory Public Meeting included concerns regarding a policy outlining design criteria for private roads. They also suggested additional policy language changes and raised site-specific issues related to minimum building heights, land use designations, and the proposed locations of schools and parks. Page 25 Municipality of Clarington Page 9 Report PDS-066-25 Agency Comments 4.6 The Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing (MMAH) submitted seven comments on the draft Secondary Plan through the One Window Provincial Planning Service. Most comments focused on minor policy language revisions to ensure consistency wit h Provincial policies and guidelines. The Secondary Plan was circulated by MMAH to staff at the Ministry of Transportation, Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks, Ministry of Economic Development, Job Creation and Trade, Ministry of Natural Resources, Ministry of Citizenship and Multiculturalism, Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Gaming, Ministry of Energy and Electrification, and Ministry of Infrastructure for input on matters related to their respective mandates. 4.7 The Region of Durham raised several concerns regarding the proposed transportation network and the fact that the Transportation Impact Study was not finalized prior to the Statutory Public Meeting. Key issues include the number of new intersections and tra il crossings proposed along Courtice Road, maintaining the prohibition of access to Courtice Road from the planned Secondary School site, and the need to protect for a future grade-separated crossing at Trulls Road. These matters have been addressed in the revised Secondary Plan. In addition, the Region will continue to be engaged as the Transportation Impact Study is finalized. 4.8 The Region also expressed concerns related to land budget calculations, specifically the exclusion of Environmental Protection Areas when determining density. Despite these issues, the Region remains generally supportive of the Secondary Plan. 4.9 The Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority (CLOCA) is generally supportive of the Secondary Plan. CLOCA requested that the environmental protection policies better convey the municipalities position with respect to potential development encroachments within the vegetation protection zone of the Environmental Protection Area. 4.10 Joint comments from the Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Boa rd and the Peterborough Victoria Northumberland and Clarington Catholic District expressed support for the Secondary Plan, noting satisfaction with the number of proposed elementary and secondary schools to accommodate future student needs. The School Board’s comments suggested minor refinements to policies to ensure that schools are adequately sized based on the needs of schools, childcare centres, and community facilities. It was also suggested that that shared outdoor play space between school boards, community facilities, and municipalities be clearly supported . Page 26 Municipality of Clarington Page 10 Report PDS-066-25 Indigenous Consultation 4.11 The following Indigenous communities were invited to provide comments or consult directly with Municipal Staff: Alderville First Nation Beausoleil First Nation Mississaugas of Scugog Island First Nation Curve Lake First Nation Georgina Island First Nation Hiawatha First Nation Kawartha Nishnawbe First Nation Métis Nation of Ontario Rama First Nation Huron-Wendat First Nation 4.12 No comments were received following circulation to the listed Indigenous communities. The Municipality of Clarington is currently collaborating with the other lower -tier municipalities in Durham Region in the creation of an Indigenous Engagement Guide for Durham Region area municipalities, informed by Durham Region’s Braiding Pathways framework and upcoming engagement with Williams Treaties First Nations. 5. Key Revisions to the Secondary Plan 5.1 Following the Statutory Public Meeting, the draft Secondary Plan was revised to address feedback from agencies, area landowners, and members of the public. In addition, edits were made to policies and maps to improve clarity, respond to recommendations emerging from Background Reports and correct typographical errors. Key revisions are detailed below. Introduction of a South Core Redevelopment Area 5.2 A new South Core Redevelopment Area has been delineated on the Land Use Plan (Schedule A) for lands south of the rail corridor and north of Baseline Road, between Trulls Road and Courtice Road. This area encompasses an established industrial park, where transitioning to a high-density, mixed-use development will require careful planning during application preparation and review. 5.3 A new policy in the Secondary Plan requires that an Implementation Strategy be prepared for lands within the South Core Redevelopment Area to address matters related to land use compatibility, the location and phasing of community facilities, such as parks, and cost-sharing arrangements for these facilities and other infrastructure improvements. Page 27 Municipality of Clarington Page 11 Report PDS-066-25 Delineation of a Special Study Area to protect for a potential rail crossing at Trulls Road 5.4 Based on the findings of the draft Transportation Impact Study, the Land Use Plan (Schedule A) and the Roads and Active Transportation Network (Schedule C) now identify a new Special Study Area. This designation protects for a potential future grade- separated crossing of the rail corridor at Trulls Road. 5.5 A new policy in the Secondary Plan details that new development in the area is prohibited until an engineering analysis is undertaken as part of the Clarington Transportation Master Plan to evaluate the feasibility of a grade -separated crossing at Trulls Road and its potential impacts on adjacent properties and nearby intersections. Modifications to the Land Use Plan (Schedule A) 5.6 Changes made to Schedule A – Land Use Plan are summarized below and detailed in Figure 2: Modified the Park (‘P’) symbol to represent both smaller Neighbourhood Parks and Parkettes. Refined the ‘Environmental Protection Area’ boundary at the north-west corner of the Secondary Plan area (west of the West Neighbourhood Park) and redesignated the lands as ‘Low Density Residential’. Revised the land use designation at the south-east corner of Granville Drive and Street H from ‘Low Density Residential’ to ‘Medium Density Residential’. Removed the ‘Moderate Environmental Constraints’ overlay and clarified in policy that the presence and precise delineation of Moderate Constraint Areas be determined through an Environmental Impact Study, including vegetation protection zones. Modified the alignment of the ‘Utility’ designation, which contains the Canadian Pacific Kansas City railway corridor. Delineated a ‘South Core Redevelopment Area’ (see 5.2 above). Delineated a ‘Special Study Area’ (see 5.4 above). Page 28 Municipality of Clarington Page 12 Report PDS-066-25 Figure 2: Changes to Schedule A – Land Use Plan Page 29 Municipality of Clarington Page 13 Report PDS-066-25 Refinements to the Roads and Active Transportation Network (Schedule C) 5.7 Changes made to Schedule C – Roads and Active Transportation Network are summarized below and detailed in Figure 3: Reclassified Street E as a ‘Key Local Road’ north of Street A and adjusted its alignment at the northern edge of the Secondary Plan. Updated Street D to a ‘Collector Road’ from a ‘Key Local Road’. Adjusted the alignment of Street B at Trulls Road. Eliminated intersections between Courtice Road and all ‘Other Local Roads.’ Modified the network of ‘Other Local Roads’ shown in the areas just north and south of Baseline Road. Moved trails to edge of the Environmental Protection Area. Delineated a Special Study Area (see 5.4 above). Page 30 Municipality of Clarington Page 14 Report PDS-066-25 Figure 3: Changes to Schedule C – Roads and Active Transportation Network Page 31 Municipality of Clarington Page 15 Report PDS-066-25 6. Policy Conformity 6.1 The recommended Secondary Plan is consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement, 2024, and conforms to the policies of the Durham Region Official Plan. A summary is provided below, however, the Statutory Public Meeting Report (PDS-026- 25) offers a more detailed explanation of how the Secondary Plan is in keeping with these planning documents. Provincial Planning Statement, 2024 6.2 The Secondary Plan is consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement, 2024 (PPS). It proposes the creation of a compact and complete community, with the highest densities located around the future Courtice GO station. Minimum densities are included in each land use designation to ensure a minimum density of 150 people and jobs per hectare is achieved within the PMTSA. Durham Region Official Plan 6.3 The Secondary Plan conforms to the Durham Region Official Plan (ROP). Lands in the Secondary Plan area are designated PMTSA, Community Areas (located outside the PMTSA), Major Open Space Areas and Employment Areas in the ROP. In addition, lands east of Courtice Road have a Regional Corridor overlay and a 2051 Urban Expansion Areas overlay. 6.4 The Secondary Plan conforms with the policies related to PMTSAs. This includes policies that plan for a minimum 150 people and jobs per hectare, permit a range of uses including medium and high density residential, office, institutional, and commercial, and community amenities, and promote sustainable transportation by designing roads to prioritize transit use, pedestrian travel, and cycling. 6.5 The Secondary Plan also conforms with the Community Areas, Major Open Space and Employment Areas policies of the ROP. The Secondary Plan permits low and medium density residential, along with parks, open space and schools, to foster a complete community in areas designated Community Areas. The Secondary Plan designates the Major Open Space Areas as Environmental Protection Area and includes land use designations and policies intended to protect lands within the Employment Areas as employment for the long-term. 7. Financial Considerations 7.1 The Official Plan requires that a Fiscal Impact Analysis (FIA) be undertaken for Secondary Plans to understand the long-term financial impacts of proposed development. Accordingly, Hemson Consulting Ltd. have prepared a FIA for the Secondary Plan, which is included as Attachment 7 to this report. Page 32 Municipality of Clarington Page 16 Report PDS-066-25 7.2 Hemson Consulting Ltd. analyzed the capital and operating costs that may be incurred and the anticipated revenue sources for the Municipality once the proposed Secondary Plan is built out. The analysis includes estimates and assumptions which were based on the best information available at the timing of writing. Actual costs and revenues will depend on the timing and type of development, capital projects required, and service impacts. 7.3 The FIA found that, when considered on its own, there would be a net negative financial impact to the Municipality once fully developed. The analysis estimated that there would be a deficit of approximately $80 per person and employee annually, or a total of $2,171,018 annually. When considered with other planned developments in the area, there is estimated to be financial efficiencies. Further, conservative financial estimates were made in assessing the development which may underestimate potential revenues. Hemson has advised that the FIA results should not be viewed as precise forecasts of what will occur at full build-out. 7.4 The fiscal projections of development charge revenue assume the use of the Municipality’s current development charge rates and therefore do not account for the anticipated passage of the new DC by-law in December 2025. 7.5 The FIA concluded that the Courtice Transit-Oriented Community is projected to be fiscally sustainable over the long-term. The cost to service new residents and employees is expected to be lower on a per capita basis compared to existing populations, primarily due to economies of scale associated with higher development densities. Furthermore, the relatively high assessed values of new apartment units, as well as commercial and institutional developments within the area, are expected to generate higher property tax revenues per resident and per employee than existing development in the Municipality. 8. Strategic Plan 8.1 The recommendation of the Secondary Plan directly addresses the following actions in the 2024-2027 Clarington Strategic Plan: C.1.1.2 Update Secondary Plan policies to include connectivity considerations and work to address gaps C.1.2.1 Support the development of the Major Transit Station Areas C.2.2.1 Identify the range of housing needed G.2.1.3 Update and complete identified Secondary Plans 9. Climate Change 9.1 The Secondary Plan has been planned with sustainability as a key priority. The Secondary Plan contains policies that facilitate and integrate opportunities for renewable and district energy and encourage high standards for energy efficiency and high - performance building envelopes. In addition, the Secondary Plan proposes a dense built form that supports transit use, efficiently uses land, and preserves natural areas. Page 33 Municipality of Clarington Page 17 Report PDS-066-25 10. Concurrence 10.1 Not Applicable. 11. Conclusion and Next Steps 11.1 The Secondary Plan has been revised in consideration of the feedback from agencies, area landowners and members of the public, as well as recommendations from the Background Reports. Revisions also include improvements for clarity and the correction of typographical errors. Staff are satisfied that the Secondary Plan is consistent with the PPS and conforms to the direction set out both in the Durham Region Official Plan and Clarington Official Plan. 11.2 Therefore, it is respectfully recommended that Clarington Official Plan Amendment 144 and Durham Region Official Plan Amendment 1 for the Courtice Transit-Oriented Community Secondary Plan be adopted and submitted to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing for approval. 11.3 In the future, a new zoning bylaw will be prepared for the Secondary Plan area. Until such time, it is expected that landowners in the Secondary Plan area will submit site specific zoning by-law amendment applications to conform to the Secondary Plan. 11.4 Implementation of the Secondary Plan will occur over the next several decades. Development will be phased to align with the delivery of required infrastructure and community facilities, including roads, sanitary sewers, water services, stormwater management facilities, parks, schools and other community facilities. Staff Contact: Amanda Crompton, Principal Planner, 905-623-3379 ext. 2444 or acrompton@clarington.net; Lisa Backus, Manager of Community Planning, 905-623-3379 ext. 2419 or lbackus@clarington.net. Attachments: Attachment 1a – Recommended Clarington Official Plan Amendment 144 Attachment 1b – Courtice Transit-Oriented Community Secondary Plan Attachment 1c – Urban Design and Sustainability Guidelines Attachment 2 – Recommended Durham Region Official Plan Amendment 1 Attachment 3 – Sequence of Events Attachment 4 – Summary of Technical Reports Attachment 5 – Public Comments Summary Table Attachment 6 – Agency Comments Summary Table Attachment 7 – Fiscal Impact Analysis Interested Parties: List of Interested Parties available from Department. Page 34 Amendment No. 144 to the Clarington Official Plan Purpose: The purpose of this Amendment is to include the new Courtice Transit-Oriented Community Secondary Plan in the Clarington Official Plan. This Secondary Plan will facilitate the development of a sustainable, livable and inclusive community in south Courtice. The Secondary Plan includes Urban Design and Sustainability Guidelines, which are not an operative part of the Clarington Official Plan. The Courtice Transit-Oriented Community Secondary Plan is centred on the future Courtice GO Transit Station and includes lands delineated as a Protected Major Transit Station Area. The Secondary Plan will feature a diverse range of housing with a mix of densities, along with new schools, community facilities, office space, commercial uses, and institutional uses that will capitalize on the excellent transportation access to the area. The Secondary Plan also prioritizes the protection of the Robinson and Too ley Creeks and associated natural environment. Location: This Amendment applies to an approximately 400-hectare area generally bounded by Robinson Creek in the west, Tooley Creek in the east, Bloor Street in the north and Highway 401 in the south. Basis: Clarington Council authorized the commencement of this Secondary Plan at a public meeting in June 2018. The Secondary Plan has been prepared in anticipation of a new GO Transit Station in an area of Courtice that is largely undeveloped, except for industrial and commercial uses along Baseline Road . This presents a unique and exciting opportunity to create a vision for a new transit-oriented community. The Secondary Plan vision and policies will guide growth and transformation of the area into a new mixed-use, transit-supportive and complete community in south Courtice. The Courtice Transit-Oriented Community Secondary Plan is based on extensive technical study and public engagement. It incorporates recommendations of the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Subwatershed Study and has been informed by a Land Use and Urban Design Analysis, a Functional Servicing Study, a Transportation Impact Study and Environmental Impact Studies. Public and landowner input was received through Public Information Centres and Public Meetings held in June 2019, September 2020, March 2022, November 2023 and June 2025, as well as through Steering Committee Meetings. Attachment 1a to Report PDS-066-25 Page 35 Actual Amendment: Unless otherwise indicated, in the Amendment, newly added text is shown with underlining, and deleted text is shown with a strike- through. 1. By amending existing Policy 4.3.5 as follows: “4.3.5 The Priority Intensification Areas have been identified as the primary locations to accommodate growth and the greatest mix of uses, heights and densities. Priority Intensification Areas include: • Urban and Village Centres; • Regional and Local Corridors; • Courtice and Bowmanville Transportation Hubs and Protected Major Transit Station Areas; and • Port Darlington and Port of Newcastle Waterfront Places.” 2. By amending existing Table 4-2 as follows: Table 4-2 Durham Region Long Term Targets General Locational Criteria Minimum Gross Density (Units Per Gross Hectare) Floor Space Index Urban Centres 75 2.5 Village Centre 30 1.0 Regional Corridors 60 2.5 Local Corridors 30 2.0 Courtice and Bowmanville Transportation Hubs 75 2.5 Courtice Protected Major Transit Station Area 150 2.5 Port Darlington and Port of Newcastle Waterfront Places 60 2.0 Page 36 3. By amending existing Table 4-3 as follows: Table 4-3 Summary of Urban Structure Typologies General Locational Criteria Minimum Net Density (Units Per Net Hectare) Standard Minimum and Maximum Height (storeys) Predominant Residential Built Form and Mix Urban Centres 120 4-12 Mid Rise: 4-6 storeys (40%) High Rise: 7-12 storeys (60%) Includes: Mixed use buildings, apartment Village Centre 45 2-6 Low Rise: 2-4 storeys (80%) Mid Rise: 5-6 storeys (20%) Includes: Mixed use buildings, apartments, townhouses Regional Corridors 85 3-12 Low Rise: 3-4 storeys (40%) Mid Rise: 5-6 storeys (40%) High Rise: 7-12 storeys (20%) Includes: Mixed use buildings, apartments Local Corridors 40 2-6 Low Rise: 2-4 storeys (80%) Mid Rise: 5-6 storeys (20%) Includes: Mixed use buildings, apartments, townhouses Courtice and Bowmanville Transportation Hubs 200 5-no maximum Mid Rise: 5-8 storeys (20%) High Rise: min. 8 storeys (80%) Includes: Mixed use buildings, apartments Courtice Protected Major Transit Station Area 200 3-no maximum Mid Rise: 3-6 storeys (20%) High Rise: 4-40 storeys (80%) Includes: Mixed use buildings, apartments, townhouses Page 37 Port Darlington and Port of Newcastle Waterfront Places 40 2-12 Ground Related: 2-3 storeys (40%) Low Rise: 2-4 storeys (20%) Mid Rise: 5-8 storeys (20%) High Rise 9-12 storeys (20%) Includes: Apartments, townhouses, semi-detached dwellings, detached dwellings Edge of neighbourhoods and adjacent to arterial roads 19 1-3 Ground Related: 1-3 storeys (100%) Includes: Limited apartments, townhouses, semi-detached dwellings, detached dwellings Internal to neighbourhood 13 1-3 Ground Related: 1-3 storeys (100%) Includes: limited townhouses, semi- detached dwellings, detached dwellings 4. By amending existing Policy 10.1.6 as follows: “10.1.6 To develop the Transportation Hubs and Protected Major Transit Station Areas in Courtice and Bowmanville as a mixed use, higher density places to support the timely expansion of the GO train to Clarington.” 5. By amending existing Policy 10.2.2 as follows: “10.2.2 To develop and improve Urban and Village Centres, Waterfront Places, Neighbourhood Centres, and the Transportation Hubs and Protected Major Transit Station Areas with a pedestrian focus and with a high quality public realm including civic squares, parks, walkways and building forms and styles that reflect the character of the community.” 6. By amending existing Policy 10.3.1 as follows: “10.3.1 Urban and Village Centres, Neighbourhood Centres, Gateway Commercial Centres, Regional and Local Corridors and Transportation Hubs and Protected Major Transit Station Areas are shown on Map A and B.” Page 38 7. By amending existing Policy 10.8.3 as follows: “10.8 Transportation Hubs and Protected Major Transit Station Areas 10.8.1 Transportation Hubs and Protected Major Transit Station Areas are identified on Map A. Transportation Hubs and Protected Major Transit Station Areas shall provide for a mix of uses at higher densities, which are complementary in terms of scale, design and context and designed to support transit services. Transportation Hubs 10.8.2 The Bowmanville Transportation Hub is located within the Bowmanville West Town Regional Centre. The Bowmanville Town Centre Secondary Plan Area policies are complementary and supportive of the Bowmanville GO Transit station and collectively create the type of development intended by section 10.8.1. Protected Major Transit Station Areas 10.8.3 The Courtice Transportation Hub Protected Major Transit Station Area is located within Special Study Area 4 the Courtice Transit-Oriented Secondary Plan area. Detailed land uses in this Transportation Hub Protected Major Transit Station Area are will be further defined in the Courtice Transit-Oriented Community Employment Lands Secondary Plan. The Secondary Plan shall includes policies for a high density, mixed use compact development within 750 metres of the GO Transit site.” 8. By amending existing Section 16.5 as follows: “16.5 Special Policy Area D - Auto Wrecking Yard – Deleted 16.5.1 Special Policy Area D is located within Special Study Area 4 Courtice Employment Area. The redevelopment of the site may not take place until such time as sewer and water services are available. In the interim, the existing uses may continue. 16.5.2 Prior to the redevelopment of the site and as a condition of approval of any development application, the proponent shall ensure that the soil conditions and ground and surface water conditions on the site are suitable for the proposed use. Development proposals on the site shall be subject to the provisions of Section 3.7.20 of this Plan” Page 39 9. By amending existing Section 17.5 as follows: “17.5 Special Study Area 4 – Courtice Employment Area – Deleted 17.5.1 The Courtice Employment Area is the largest concentration of designated employment lands in Clarington. This area is the gateway to Courtice. These lands have easy access to Highways 401 and 418, proximity to the Energy Business Park and the waterfront and it is centred around the future GO Rail Station. The synergy of these attributes offer unique possibilities for the Municipality to create employment and mixed use developments. The future GO Rail station will be a multi-modal transportation centre with connections to the road system, Regional transit network and the future Highway 418 bus rapid transit system and an active transportation network. 17.5.2 The Municipality will prepare a Secondary Plan for the area that would create the policy framework to guide the development of these lands, with particular attention to develop transit supportive uses around the future Courtice GO Rail Station. In preparing the Secondary Plan, the Municipality will examine: • Land uses that would best enable the full development of a transportation hub; • The means of increasing employment densities; • The redistribution of employment uses along the Highway 418 corridor and consideration of residential and mixed- uses around the Courtice Road corridor; • The development of an active transportation network; and • The protection of the natural heritage system. 17.5.3 It is recognized that Special Study Area 4 includes lands currently outside of the urban area boundary and that the full implementation of the planning concept will be dependent on consideration in the next Regional Official Plan comprehensive review.” 10. By amending existing Policy 19.4.3 as follows: “19.4.3 To implement the public transit network for Clarington, the Municipality encourages the Province and the Region to: a) Implement the approved eastern extension of GO Rail service to the Courtice Protected Major Transit Station Area and the Bowmanville Transportation Hubs by 2024, recognizing that GO Rail service is critical to achieving many of the land use objectives Page 40 of Provincial Plans and the Durham Regional Official Plan and this Plan;” 11. By amending existing Policy 19.4.4 as follows: “19.4.4 To work in partnership with the Province and the Region to provide a transit-supportive environment, the Municipality will: a) Direct higher density development and economic activity around the Transportation Hubs and Protected Major Transit Station Areas, along or near the Regional Transit Spine, and along Regional and Local Corridors;” 12. Existing Clarington Official Plan, Map A1 Land Use West Clarington Rural Area, is amended by expanding the Courtice Urban Boundary to reflect the Secondary Plan boundary as demonstrated on Exhibit A. The expanded Urban Boundary is reflected on all subsequent exhibits and is intended to be reflected on all other maps in the Official Plan. 13. Existing Clarington Official Plan, Map A2 Land Use Courtice Urban Area, is amended as demonstrated on Exhibit B. 14. Existing Clarington Official Plan, Map B Urban Structure, is amended by identifying the newly expanded Courtice Urban Boundary lands as Greenfield and depicting the Protected Major Transit Station Area on the map as demonstrated on Exhibit C. 15. Existing Clarington Official Plan, Map C Secondary Plan Areas, is amended by changing the status to “Completed” as demonstrated on Exhibit D. 16. Existing Clarington Official Plan, Map J2 Transportation Network Roads and Transit Courtice Urban Area, is amended by adding five new collector roads as demonstrated on Exhibit E. 17. Existing Part Six, Section 3 “General Policies for Secondary Plans” is hereby amended as follows: “3. Secondary Plans have been prepared for the following areas: a) Bowmanville East Urban Centre; b) Bowmanville West Town Centre; c) Courtice Main Street; d) Newcastle Village Main Central Area; e) Port Darlington Neighbourhood; f) Bayview (Southwest); Page 41 g)Clarington Energy Business Park h)Brookhill Neighbourhood; i)Clarington Technology Business Park; j)Foster Northwest; k)Southeast Courtice; and l)Wilmot Creek.; and m)Courtice Transit-Oriented Community.” 18. Existing Part Six, SECONDARY PLANS, is amended by adding the new Courtice Transit-Oriented Community Secondary Plan shown in Attachment 1. Page 42 !( !( !( !( !( s s s s s !( !( !( !( !( !( 5 5 55 5 5 k k k k CONCESSION ROAD 3 PR O V I D E N C E RO A D RO A D RE G I O N A L R O A D 4 2 LA M B S AV E N U E LI B E R T Y ST R E E T N O R T H GR E E N CONCESSION ROAD 10 BOUNDARY ROAD CO C H R A N E RO A D TO W N L I N E R O A D N O R T H CONCESSION ROAD 9 EN F I E L D RO A D WO T T E N RO A D CONCESSION ROAD 9 REGIONAL ROAD 3 OL D SC U G O G R O A D UN I O N S C H O O L R O A D RE G I O N A L R O A D 5 7 GR A S S H O P P E R PAR K RO A D RO A D WO O D L E Y RO A D REGIONAL ROAD 20 LI B E R T Y S T NO R T H AK E D RO A D CONCESSION ROAD 8 LO N G S A U L T R O A D MU R P H Y R O A D DA R L I N G T O N - C L A R K E T O W N L I N E R O A D CONCESSION ROAD 7 RO A D BE T H E S D A CL E M E N S R O A D LI B E R T Y S T N O R T H MI D D L E LE T N E R R O A D RO A D RO A D HO L T RO A D RO A D LE A S K R O A D (E N F I E L D R O A D ) VA N N E S T R O A D WE R R Y R O A D SO L I N A RO A D CONCESSION ROAD 7 SC U G O G OL D RE G I O N A L R O A D 5 7 CE D A R P A R K R O A D NO R T H ST R E E T AC R E S R O A D CONCESSION ROAD 6 DA R L I N G T O N - C L A R K E TO W N L I N E R D COLE ROAD AC R E S R O A D REGIONAL ROAD 4 (TAUNTON ROAD) HO L T R O A D RU N D L E WA S H I N G T O N R O A D RE G I O N A L R O A D 3 4 LA N G M A I D R O A D PEBBLESTONE ROAD TO O L E Y RO A D TO W N L I N E R O A D N O R T H TR U L L S RO A D RE G I O N A L RO A D 3 4 RO A D OL D S C U G O G R O A D NASH ROAD RE G I O N A L R O A D 5 7 MI D D L E RO A D CONCESSION ROAD 4 LI B E R T Y GAUD GATE ME A R N S AV E N U E BET H E S D A RO A D STEPH E N S M I L L ROAD CONCESSION ROAD 4 MA P L E GR O V E RO A D RO A D HO L T RU N D L E RO A D SO L I N A RO A D HA N C O C K RO A D CO U R T I C E RO A D TR U L L S RO A D PR E S T O N V A L E RO A D ENERGY DRIVE HIGHWAY 401 BASELINE ROAD RE G I O N A L R O A D 5 7 LI B E R T Y S T S . ME A R N S LA M B S RO A D BR A G G RI C K A R D RO A D CONCESSION STREET CONCESSION CONCESSION BR O W N R O A D NI X O N R O A D REGIONAL ROAD 4 (TAUNTON ROAD) CONCESSION CONCESSION GI B S O N R O A D DURHA M H I G H W A Y 2 DURHAM H I G H W A Y 2 BROWVIEW ROAD CRAGO ROAD ENERGY DRIVE (B O W M A N V I L L E A V E N U E ) (B O W M A N V I L L E A V E N U E ) (B O W M A N V I L L E A V E N U E ) (B O W M A N V I L L E A V E N U E ) 2 Lot 14378955 35 112117 1012131420151916242218262528312927303435333223 34 CO N C E S S I O N B F CO N C E S S I O N 1 CO N C E S S I O N 2 CO N C E S S I O N 3 CO N C E S S I O N 4 CO N C E S S I O N 5 CO N C E S S I O N 7 CO N C E S S I O N 1 0 CO N C E S S I O N 6 CO N C E S S I O N 8 CO N C E S S I O N 9 Solina Enniskillen Hampton Burketon Tyrone Mitchell Corners Haydon Maple Grove Enfield Lake Ontario³ URBAN UTILITY COMMUNITY PARK HAMLET PARK NATURAL CORE AREA NATURAL LINKAGE AREA ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AREA ESTATE RESIDENTIAL HAMLET AGGREGATE EXTRACTION AREA PRIME AGRICULTURAL AREA RURAL !CP ORM BOUNDARY GREENBELT BOUNDARY TOURISM NODE GOLF COURSE ks D3-DEFERRED BY THE REGION OF DURHAM WEST CLARINGTON RURAL AREA OFFICIAL PLAN MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON November, 2024 LAND USE MAP A1 !CP !HP !HP !HP !HP !HP !HP !HP Expand Urban Boundary Exhibit 'A', Amendment No.144 To the Municipality of Clarington Official Plan, Map A1. Courtice Urban Boundary will be amended on all subsequent schedules of the OP C.P.R C.P.R C.N.R HYDRO CORRIDOR HYDRO C O R R I D O R HYDRO C O R R I D O R HYDRO CO R R I D O R HY D R O C O R R I D O R HY D R O C O R R I D O R HYDRO CORRIDOR TRANS-C A N A D A P I P E L I N E INTER-P R O V I N C I A L P I P E L I N E TRANS-NORTHERN PIPE L I N E COURTICE URBAN AREA (SEE MAP A2)BOWMANVILLE URBAN AREA (SEE MAP A3) NEWCASTLE VILLAGE URBAN AREA (SEE MAP A4) HIGHWAY 401 HIGHWAY 407 Page 43 5 5 !!! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! !!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! !!! ! !!!!! ! ! ! VA R C O E R O A D CE N T E R F I E L D D R I V E TO O L E Y R O A D GE O R G E REYN O L D S DRIVE RO B E R T A D A M S DR I V E PR E S T O N V A L E R O A D RI DR I V E NG H A M SA N D DRI V E AVO N D A L E GLENABBEY DRIVE RO A D FE N N I N G D R I V E PR E S T O N V A L E RO A D TR U L L S R O A D BASELINE ROAD ENERGY DRIVE PEBBLESTONE ROAD HI G H W A Y 4 1 8 SPECIAL STUDY AREA 1 SPECIAL STUDY AREA 1 C.N. R MEADOWGLADE AVENUE C.P.R CR A G O R O A D HA N C O C K CO U R T I C E R O A D SO L I N A R A O D SO L I N A R O A D A107-6 ³ McLaughlin Bay Lake Ontario URBAN RESIDENTIAL URBAN CENTRE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AREA GREEN SPACE WATERFRONT GREENWAY BUSINESS PARK ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AREA GENERAL INDUSTRIAL AREA UTILITY REGIONAL CORRIDOR MUNICIPAL WIDE PARK URBAN BOUNDARY !!!!!!!!!!SPECIAL STUDY AREA COMMUNITY PARK å SECONDARY SCHOOL NEIGHBOURHOOD CENTRE !MP D4-DEFERRED BY THE REGION OF DURHAM APPEALED TO THE OMBA107 COURTICE URBAN AREA OFFICIAL PLAN MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON November, 2024 LAND USE MAP A2 GO PRESTIGE EMPLOYMENT AREA PROTECTED MAJOR TRANSIT STATION AREAGO HIGHWAY 401 MPMP !CP CP CP Exhibit 'B', Amendment No.144 To the Municipality of Clarington Official Plan, Map A2. Expand Urban Boundary Remove Special Policy Area D Change From Light Industrial To General Industrial Change From General Industrial To Urban Residential Change From Prime Agricultural Area to Regional Corridor Change From Prime Agricultural Area to Urban Residential Change From Regional Corridor to Protected Major Transit Station Area Change From Prestige Employment Area to Protected Major Transit Station Area Change from Transportation Hub to Protected Major Transit Station Area Change From Prime Agricultural Area to Protected Major Transit Station Area Remove Special Study Area 4 Change from Transportation Hub to Protected Major Transit Station Area SPECIAL POLICY AREA Remove From Legend å Change From Light Industrial To Protected Major Transit Station Area Change From Prestige Employment Area To Protected Major Transit Station Area Change From Regional Corridor To Protected Major Transit Station Area Change From Light Industrial To Protected Major Transit Station Area Page 44 HI G H W A Y 4 1 8 RO A D OS B O R N E VI C K E R S R O A D WA S H I N G T O N R O A D BUTTERY RO A D HI G H W A Y 3 5 / 1 1 5 ST E P H E N S O N ENERGY DRIVE CO U R T I C E (B O W M A N V I L L E A V E N U E ) ROAD ST R E E T N O R T H ME A R N S MA P L E RE G I O N A L R O A D 5 7 (TAUNTON ROAD) RO A D CONCESSION FI C E S R O A D TAUNUS CRT RE G I O N A L R O A D 1 7 LA W R E N C E R O A D RO A D RO A D CRT ROAD BET H E S D A OL D S C U G O G R O A D CONCESSION LA M B S CONCESSION PO L L A R D BE L L W O O D CRAGO ROAD TO O L E Y GO L F C O U R S E HA N C O C K DURHAM H I G H W A Y 2 (M A I N S T R E E T ) BR A G G ROAD 4 RI L E Y GLENELGE ME A R N S PR E S T O N V A L E NASH BE S T RO A D TR U L L S ROAD 5 AV E N U E ENERGY DRIVE LO C K H A R T R O A D CONCESSION ROAD 3 RE G I O N A L R O A D 3 4 CONCESSION RO A D SQ U A I R R O A D ROAD RO A D HIGHWAY 40 1 RO A D CRT MI D D L E GR E E N CONCESSION HO L T R O A D ROAD 4 REGIONAL ROAD 4 RO A D 3 4 RO A D ROAD 3 RO A D GAUD PEBBLESTONE SO L I N A RO A D BU C K L E Y MI L L STREET DR I V E ANDELWOOD AD A M S TR U L L S RE G I O N A L R O A D 5 7 RO A D GI B S O N R O A D RE G I O N A L R O A D 4 2 (TAUNTON ROAD) RO A D BLEWETT JE W E L RO A D CRT HO L T RI C K A R D HIGHWAY 401 RO A D CRT AV E N U E ROAD LE S K A R D LA M B S GR O V E REGIONAL ROAD 4 RO A D AR T H U R S T R E E T MO F F A T R O A D PR O V I D E N C E BROWVIEW ROAD LA N G M A I D R O A D CRAIG CRT RU N D L E RO A D OC H O N S K I R O A D MARYLEAH RO A D BASELINE ROAD 4 RO A D RO A D RO A D DURHAM HIGHWAY 2 RE G I O N A L RU N D L E CONCESSION ROAD GATE RO A D ST R E E T DURHA M H I G H W A Y 2 GA M S B Y R O A D RO A D LI B E R T Y RO A D STEPH E N S M I L L LI B E R T Y S T S . LI B E R T Y TO W N L I N E R O A D N O R T H (B O W M A N V I L L E A V E N U E ) ³Lake Ontario COURTICE BOWMANVILLE NEWCASTLE VILLAGE ORONO GO GO CLARINGTON URBAN AREAS OFFICIAL PLAN MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON November, 2024 URBAN STRUCTURE MAP B Exhibit 'C', Amendment No.144 To the Municipality of Clarington Official Plan, Map B. Expand Urban Boundary BUILT BOUNDARY BUILT UP AREA GREENFIELD URBAN BOUNDARY PRIORITY INTENSIFICATION AREAS TRANSPORTATION HUBS AND PROTECTED MAJOR TRANSIT STATION AREAS CENTRE REGIONAL CORRIDOR WATERFRONT PLACE LOCAL CORRIDOR GO PROTECTED MAJOR TRANSIT STATION AREA Add To Legend Add Protected Major Transit Station Areas Add Protected Major Transit Station Area Page 45 HI G H W A Y 4 1 8 RO A D OS B O R N E TR U L L S BUTTERY RO A D HI G H W A Y 3 5 / 1 1 5 ENERGY DRIVE CO U R T I C E (B O W M A N V I L L E A V E N U E ) ROAD ST R E E T N O R T H ME A R N S MA P L E RE G I O N A L R O A D 5 7 (TAUNTON ROAD) RO A D CONCESSION FI C E S R O A D TAUNUS CRT RE G I O N A L R O A D 1 7 RO A D CRT ROAD BET H E S D A OL D S C U G O G R O A D CONCESSION LA M B S CONCESSION PO L L A R D BE L L W O O D CRAGO ROAD TO O L E Y HA N C O C K DURHAM H I G H W A Y 2 (M A I N S T R E E T ) BR A G G ROAD 4 RI L E Y GLENELGE ME A R N S PR E S T O N V A L E NASH RO A D TR U L L S ROAD 5 AV E N U E ENERGY DRIVE LO C K H A R T R O A D CONCESSION ROAD 3 CONCESSION RO A D SQ U A I R R O A D ROAD HIGHWAY 40 1 RO A D CRT MI D D L E GR E E N CONCESSION ROAD 4 REGIONAL ROAD 4 RO A D 3 4 RO A D GAUD PEBBLESTONE SO L I N A RO A D BU C K L E Y MI L L STREET DR I V E ANDELWOOD TR U L L S RE G I O N A L R O A D 5 7 RO A D GI B S O N R O A D RE G I O N A L R O A D 4 2 (TAUNTON ROAD) RO A D BLEWETT RO A D CRT HO L T RI C K A R D RO A D CRT AV E N U E ROAD LA M B S GR O V E RO A D AR T H U R S T R E E T MO F F A T R O A D PR O V I D E N C E BROWVIEW ROAD CRAIG CRT RU N D L E RO A D OC H O N S K I R O A D MARYLEAH BASELINE ROAD 4 RO A D RO A D RO A D RE G I O N A L CONCESSION ROAD GATE RO A D ST R E E T DURHA M H I G H W A Y 2 GA M S B Y R O A D RO A D LI B E R T Y RO A D STEPH E N S M I L L LI B E R T Y S T S . LI B E R T Y TO W N L I N E R O A D N O R T H (B O W M A N V I L L E A V E N U E ) ³Lake Ontario Courtice Newcastle Village Bowmanville NOTE: ALL EXISTING SECONDARY PLANS NEED TO BE UPDATED TO CONFORM TO THE OFFICIAL PLAN EXCEPT FOR COURTICE MAIN STREET SECONDARY PLAN. Orono CLARINGTON URBAN AREAS OFFICIAL PLAN MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON November, 2024 SECONDARY PLAN AREAS MAP C SETTLEMENT AREA BOUNDARY SECONDARY PLAN BOUNDARIES NOT COMPLETED COMPLETED Exhibit 'D', Amendment No. 144 To the Municipality of Clarington Official Plan, Map C. Update Secondary Plan Boundary Change Status To Completed Expand Urban Boundary Page 46 ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! XY XY XYXY !( !(!(!(!( !(XY !( !( TO O L E Y R O A D TR U L L S R O A D CO U R T I C E R O A D HA N C O C K R D DURHAM TO W N L I N E R O A D C. P. R. HIGHWAY 2 HI G H W A Y 4 1 8 BASELINE ROAD C. N. R . BLOOR STREET HIGHWAY 401 MEADOWGLADE ROAD PEBBLESTONE RD AVENUE REYNOLDS HA N C O C K R D DRIVEGEORGE ADELAIDE PR E S T O N V A L E R O A D FUTURE FREEWAY INTERCHANGE PROPOSED GRADE SEPARATION !!RAIL TRANSIT LINE ³ Lake Ontario RAILWAY TYPE B ARTERIAL ROAD TYPE C ARTERIAL ROAD PROTECTED MAJOR TRANSIT STATION AREA REGIONAL TRANSIT SPINE EXISTING FREEWAY INTERCHANGE EXISTING GRADE SEPARATION COLLECTOR ROAD FREEWAY URBAN AREA TYPE A ARTERIAL ROAD !( !( XYXY GO FREEWAY BUS RAPID TRANSIT LINE!!!!! GO COURTICE URBAN AREA OFFICIAL PLAN MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON November, 2024 TRANSPORTATION NETWORK ROADS AND TRANSIT MAP J2 Exhibit 'E', Amendment No.144 To the Municipality of Clarington Official Plan, Map J2. Expand Urban Boundary Add Collector Roads Change from Transportation Hub to Protected Major Transit Station Area Page 47 Secondary Plans Courtice Transit-Oriented Community Secondary Plan Municipality of Clarington Official Plan December 2025 – Revised Attachment 1b to Report PDS-066-25 Page 48 Courtice Transit-Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan 2 Table of Contents Courtice Transit-Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan ............................... 5 1 Introduction ...................................................................................................... 5 2 Vision and Principles ....................................................................................... 6 2.1 Vision .............................................................................................................. 6 2.2 Principles ........................................................................................................ 6 3 Community Structure....................................................................................... 7 3.1 Courtice GO Station ........................................................................................ 7 3.2 High-Density Mixed Use Core ......................................................................... 7 3.3 Transit Corridor ............................................................................................... 7 3.4 Urban Residential Areas ................................................................................. 7 3.5 Employment Areas .......................................................................................... 8 3.6 Parks ............................................................................................................... 8 3.7 Natural Areas .................................................................................................. 8 3.8 Green Active Transportation Spine ................................................................. 8 3.9 Highways ........................................................................................................ 8 4 Environment and Energy ................................................................................. 9 4.1 Objectives ....................................................................................................... 9 4.2 General Policies .............................................................................................. 9 4.3 Environmental Protection Areas.................................................................... 10 4.4 Urban Forest ................................................................................................. 12 4.5 Energy .......................................................................................................... 12 4.6 Green Development ...................................................................................... 13 5 Land Use and Built Form ............................................................................... 14 5.1 Objectives ..................................................................................................... 14 5.2 General Policies ............................................................................................ 14 5.3 Mixed Use Core ............................................................................................ 15 5.4 Mixed Use Transition Area ............................................................................ 18 5.5 Medium Density Residential ......................................................................... 19 5.6 Low Density Residential ................................................................................ 20 5.7 Business District ........................................................................................... 21 5.8 Light Industrial............................................................................................... 21 Page 49 Courtice Transit-Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan 3 5.9 General Industrial.......................................................................................... 22 5.10 Environmental Protection Area .................................................................. 22 5.11 Utility .......................................................................................................... 23 5.12 Special Study Area .................................................................................... 23 6 Urban Design .................................................................................................. 24 6.1 Objectives ..................................................................................................... 24 6.2 General Policies ............................................................................................ 24 6.3 Placemaking and Streetscapes..................................................................... 24 6.4 Building Siting and Design ............................................................................ 25 7 Housing ........................................................................................................... 27 7.1 Objectives ..................................................................................................... 27 7.2 General Policies ............................................................................................ 28 7.3 Affordable Housing ....................................................................................... 28 8 Parks and Community Facilities ................................................................... 29 8.1 Objectives ..................................................................................................... 29 8.2 General Policies ............................................................................................ 29 8.3 Special Park .................................................................................................. 30 8.4 Neighbourhood Parks and Parkettes ............................................................ 30 8.5 Urban Parks and Squares ............................................................................. 31 8.6 Schools ......................................................................................................... 31 8.7 Other Community Facilities ........................................................................... 32 9 Cultural Heritage ............................................................................................ 33 9.1 Objectives ..................................................................................................... 33 9.2 Policies ......................................................................................................... 33 10 Transportation ................................................................................................ 34 10.1 Objectives .................................................................................................. 34 10.2 General Policies ........................................................................................ 34 10.3 Arterial Roads ............................................................................................ 36 10.4 Collector Roads ......................................................................................... 37 10.5 Local Roads and Mews ............................................................................. 37 10.6 Rear Lanes ................................................................................................ 38 10.7 Active Transportation ................................................................................. 39 Page 50 Courtice Transit-Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan 4 10.8 Transit Facilities ......................................................................................... 40 11 Servicing ......................................................................................................... 40 11.1 Objectives .................................................................................................. 40 11.2 General Policies ........................................................................................ 41 11.3 Stormwater Management .......................................................................... 42 12 Implementation and Interpretation ............................................................... 44 12.1 Objectives .................................................................................................. 44 12.2 Policies ...................................................................................................... 44 SCHEDULES AND APPENDICES Schedule A – Land Use Plan Schedule B – Parks and Community Facilities Schedule C – Roads and Active Transportation Network Appendix A – Urban Design and Sustainability Guidelines Page 51 Courtice Transit-Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan 5 Courtice Transit-Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan 1 Introduction The Courtice Transit-Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan area is located south of Bloor Street, north of Highway 401, east of Robinson Creek, and west of Tooley Creek and Highway 418. The Secondary Plan area is almost 400 hectares comprised of natural features, farmland and industrial uses at the time of this Plan’s adoption. The planned population for the area is approximately 29,000 residents and planned employment is approximately 8,000 jobs. The Municipality of Clarington initiated the CTOC Secondary Plan in 2019 to establish a framework and policies to guide the area’s development over the coming decades with a blend of residential, office, retail, institutional, industrial and other employme nt uses, oriented to a transit network centred on the planned Courtice GO Station. Except for industrial and commercial uses along Baseline Road, the Secondary Plan area is largely undeveloped and today comprises mostly farmland and natural areas. A key driver of growth and development in the area will be the future Courtice GO Station as well as access to Highways 401 and 418. The Region of Durham has delineated lands north and south of the future station as a Protected Major Transit Station Area (PMTSA) to provide a focus for transit-supportive development at high and medium densities. Formerly designated for employment uses, Durham Region, in recently updating its Official Plan, approved a series of employment land conversions to permit a broader mix of uses, including residential, to achieve the overall vision for a transit -oriented community centered on the future GO Station. Outside of the PMTSA, adjacent to the highways, two areas within CTOC have been maintained for employment uses. In building on Clarington’s Official Plan with area-specific policies, the CTOC Secondary Plan conforms to the Region’s Official Plan (Envision Durham) and the Regional Transit Oriented Development Strategy and is consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement. The purpose of this Secondary Plan is to establish goals and policies to guide development within the Secondary Plan area as it is implemented through subdivision, zoning and site plan control. The Urban Design and Sustainability Guidelines appended to the Plan support the policies and will also be used to guide development. Page 52 Courtice Transit-Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan 6 2 Vision and Principles The vision and principles described in this section provide the foundation upon which the goals and policies of the Secondary Plan are based. 2.1 Vision The Courtice Transit-Oriented Community is envisioned to be a unique new green community offering all types of housing to accommodate approximately 29,000 residents, a variety of jobs for more than 8,000 workers, and a full range of amenities. CTOC will be inclusive. A range of housing choices will be provided, including single- detached and semi-detached houses, townhouses, duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes and apartment buildings. There will be a significant supply of affordable ownership and rental housing as well as supportive housing to ensure the needs of individuals and families at all stages of life can be met. CTOC will be diverse. A variety of housing and employment opportunities will help ensure the community is socially diverse. This will be matched with diversity in the built environment—housing at all scales; different styles of architecture; a mix of shops, restaurants and entertainment; and open spaces and indoor facilities for all manner of recreational interests. CTOC will be vibrant. The design of neighbourhoods, parks and streetscapes and a high-density, mixed-use core will encourage street life, social interactions and community gatherings. Institutional uses, a high -quality public realm and a diverse local economy will support ongoing vitality and attract visitors from across the region. CTOC will be connected. The future Courtice GO Station, adjacent highways and existing arterial roads will connect residents and businesses to destinations and communities across the Greater Toronto Area. An interconnected network of local streets, trails, pathways and bike lanes will make it easy to get arou nd by walking, cycling and taking local transit. CTOC will be green. The valley lands and forests that surround CTOC will provide a rich green setting for development, and neighbourhood parks scattered across the community will provide a gathering and play space for every neighbourhood. A central park and urban squares will offset the high density of development in the core and provide places for respite, picnicking and events. Environmental design features applied to buildings, open spaces, infrastructure and the community as a whole will help ensure CTOC supports Clarington’s Priority Green goals and standards for sustainability. 2.2 Principles The CTOC Secondary Plan is based on the following principles. 2.2.1 Protect, enhance, and value significant natural features, including Robinson Creek, Tooley Creek and Lake Ontario and their associated environmental and hydrologic features and natural hazards. 2.2.2 Conserve and integrate the area’s cultural heritage. Page 53 Courtice Transit-Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan 7 2.2.3 Optimize planned rapid transit facilities and generally encourage the use of transit. 2.2.4 Build a welcoming and inclusive community with a range of housing types at all levels of affordability. 2.2.5 Accommodate a range of businesses and a high level of employment. 2.2.6 Create an accessible, walkable and bikeable community linked to adjacent and regional transportation networks. 2.2.7 Ensure all residents have access to parks, schools and other community facilities. 2.2.8 Ensure climate change mitigation and adaptation are critical considerations in planning, design and construction, and strive to achieve net zero carbon emissions. 2.2.9 Coordinate the phasing of private development and public investments. 3 Community Structure The CTOC Secondary Plan is supported by a community structure comprised of the following. 3.1 Courtice GO Station 3.1.1 The growth and prosperity of CTOC will depend on a multi-modal transportation network centred on the future Courtice GO Station. The station and surrounding lands provide a focus for high-density housing, office development and commercial amenities that, together with a pedestrian -friendly public realm, contribute to creating a unique mixed-use district. 3.2 High-Density Mixed Use Core 3.2.1 The core of CTOC, located around the future GO Station, will be the area for the highest densities of development, the tallest buildings and the greatest range of uses. This will be the place to find a variety of options for housing, working, shopping, dining and entertainment. At the edges of the core, development will be less intense to provide a transition to lower scale neighbourhoods. 3.3 Transit Corridor 3.3.1 Courtice Road is a Transit Corridor that will be the primary transportation route to and through CTOC for transit, commercial and personal vehicles. As such, it will be a focus for transit-oriented development and streetscaping that supports active transportation and reinforces Clarington’s identity as an attractive, sustainable community. 3.4 Urban Residential Areas 3.4.1 North and west of the core, CTOC will comprise mostly low-rise neighbourhoods at varying densities and with a variety of housing types as well as Page 54 Courtice Transit-Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan 8 neighbourhood-oriented commercial amenities. Within the PMTSA, medium- density forms of housing will be dominant, while west of Trulls Road there will be a full range of residential types, from detached homes to mid-rise apartment buildings. Interconnected local street networks will connect neighbourhoods to one another and to the attractions in the core. 3.5 Employment Areas 3.5.1 Areas adjacent Highway 401, south of the rail corridor, will be maintained mostly for industrial uses that benefit from convenient highway access to broaden employment opportunities for Courtice residents. Complementing the Clarington Energy Park, these areas will provide a stable environment for the growth of established and new businesses that diversify Clarington’s economy. 3.6 Parks 3.6.1 Future residential and mixed-use neighbourhoods will be centred on Neighbourhood Parks, including four significant parks, to ensure most residents are within short walking distance of public green space. In addition, a central “Special Park” will serve all of CTOC and, as a multi-purpose space for events, is expected to be a civic destination for all Courtice residents. Multi -use paths and mid-block connections throughout the community will further contribute to a green framework for development. 3.7 Natural Areas 3.7.1 The valley lands of Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek, tributaries that feed them and forested areas all surround the CTOC Secondary Plan area, establish a rich and sensitive green setting for development. As these areas are protected and enhanced, they will become an amenity for future residents and visitors, fundamental to the community’s environmental health and social well -being. 3.8 Green Active Transportation Spine 3.8.1 Between Trulls Road and Courtice Road, a continuous north-south landscaped multi-use path will function as a green active transportation corridor that connects neighbourhoods, parkland and forests in the north half of the PMTSA to the future GO Station and other destinations in the south half. In the long term, Clarington may explore the feasibility of a pedestrian/bicycle bridge over Highway 401 to connect the green spine with the Courtice waterfront, in accordance with Ministry of Transportation requirements. 3.9 Highways 3.9.1 Although Highways 401 and 418 are located just outside the CTOC area, they are integral to its overall physical structure. They help to frame the area, and their presence will influence land uses and the road network. Employment uses, in particular, will benefit from the visibility and access the highways afford. Page 55 Courtice Transit-Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan 9 4 Environment and Energy 4.1 Objectives 4.1.1 Avoid adverse impacts on existing ecosystems and natural heritage features. 4.1.2 Enhance connectivity between natural heritage features. 4.1.3 Enhance the natural heritage network as an amenity. 4.1.4 Provide appropriate vegetation protection zones between development and sensitive natural heritage features. 4.1.5 Maintain the general topography of the area and encourage the use of natural drainage patterns, where possible, to minimize the risk of flooding. 4.1.6 Increase the tree canopy throughout the Secondary Plan area. 4.1.7 Design buildings, infrastructure and the community as a whole to minimize greenhouse gas emissions and ensure high standards for energy and water conservation. 4.1.8 Design buildings, infrastructure and open spaces to mitigate the impacts of severe storms, flooding, droughts and the broader impacts of climate change. 4.1.9 Facilitate and integrate opportunities for renewable and district energy in development and the community as a whole. 4.2 General Policies 4.2.1 All development shall adhere to the policies of the Clarington Official Plan, as it pertains to the policy areas of the Natural Heritage System in Section 3.4, the Watershed and Subwatershed Plans policies in Section 3.5, the Natural Resources policies in Section 3.6, the Hazards policies in Section 3.7 and the Environmental Protection Areas policies in Section 14.4. 4.2.2 Environmental studies prepared in support of development applications shall address the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Subwatershed Study (Subwatershed Study). Such studies may refine on a site -by-site basis the recommendations from the Subwatershed Study. 4.2.3 For those properties not assessed for Headwater Drainage Features in the Subwatershed Study or where agricultural fields have gone fallow, Headwater Drainage Feature Assessments may be required prior to any development in order to accurately assess hydrologic functions of these features. 4.2.4 The revegetation of riparian corridors less than 30 metres wide shall be encouraged. 4.2.5 The preservation of mature trees, within and outside of the Environmental Protection Area, is strongly encouraged in order to fully derive benefits relating to microclimate, wildlife habitats, hydrology and scenic quality. In this regard, mitigation measures such as tree protection fencing, silt fence/sedimentation Page 56 Courtice Transit-Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan 10 control, dust control, and protection of the soil moisture regime shall be utilized during construction adjacent to the Environmental Protection Areas. 4.2.6 In accordance with Clarington Official Plan Policy 5.6.5, development applications will be required to include a Sustainability Report that indicates how the development meets the sustainable development policies and objectives contained within the Clarington Official Plan and this Secondary Plan. 4.3 Environmental Protection Areas 4.3.1 Environmental Protection Areas, identified in Schedule A, include natural heritage features, hydrologically sensitive features, lands within the regulatory flood plain of a watercourse, headwater drainage features with a “Protection” classification and hazard lands associated with valley systems, including slope and erosion hazards. 4.3.2 The delineations of the boundary of lands designated as Environmental Protection Area are approximate and shall be detailed through appropriate studies prepared as part of the review of development applications in accordance with the policies of this Secondary Plan and the Clarington Official Plan. 4.3.3 Areas associated with Environmental Protection Areas, including vegetation protection zones, shall be detailed through Environmental Impact Studies and considered to be designated Environmental Protection Area . 4.3.4 Where an Environmental Impact Study or other site -specific study required as part of development proposals within 120 metres of a natural heritage feature results in refinements to the boundaries of the natural heritage feature or its related vegetation protection zone, such refinements shall not require an amendment to the Clarington Official Plan or this Secondary Plan. 4.3.5 The vegetation protection zone shall be planted, maintained or restored with self- sustaining, native plant materials, in keeping with the Environmental Impact Study recommendations. 4.3.6 The Subwatershed Study identifies and assesses a number of Headwater Drainage Features. Those identified as “protection” are included in the Environmental Protection Area designation. For those Headwater Drainage Features identified as “conservation”, applications for development shall, in consultation with the Conservation Authority: a) Maintain, relocate on-site and/or enhance the drainage feature and its riparian corridor; b) If catchment drainage will be removed due to diversion of stormwater flows, restore lost functions through enhanced lot level controls as feasible; c) Maintain or replace on‐site flows using mitigation measures and/or wetland creation, if necessary; d) Maintain or replace external flows to the extent feasible; and Page 57 Courtice Transit-Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan 11 e) Use natural channel design techniques to maintain or enhance the overall productivity of the reach. 4.3.7 Headwater Drainage Features that have been relocated and the associated riparian corridors established through Policy 4.3.6 shall be considered to be designated Environmental Protection Area and shall be zoned appropriately to prohibit development. 4.3.8 A trail system shall be designed and built to connect the CTOC area to the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek valley lands, while protecting and enhancing the natural features and functions of these lands. The Municipality will require trails conceptually identified on Schedule C to be assessed as part of an Environmental Impact Study undertaken for development on adjacent lands. 4.3.9 The Municipality may require Environmental Protection Areas to be conveyed to a public authority, where appropriate, as part of the development approval process at minimal or no cost to the receiving public authority. Conveyance of lands designated Environmental Protection Area and associated vegetation protection zones shall not be considered as contributions towards the parkland dedication requirements under the Planning Act. 4.3.10 Consultation is required with the Municipality prior to the removal of any trees, significant shrubs and/or features. Where trees, significant shrubs and/or other significant features are destroyed or harvested pre -maturely prior to proper study and approval, compensation should occur on site and shall be calculated at a 3:1 ratio. Moderate and Low Environmental Constraint Areas 4.3.11 Environmental constraints include features identified as “Moderate Constraint Areas” and “Low Constraint Areas” in the Subwatershed Study. These features are not currently identified as Environmental Protection Areas but have potential ecological and/or hydrological value that requires site -specific assessment prior to development. Moderate Constraint Areas include: a) Wetlands over 0.5 ha that are isolated and/or of lower sensitivity/quality; b) Category 1 and 2 Hedgerows identified as linkages; c) Vegetation protection zones; d) Species-at-risk setbacks; e) Complex Ecological Land Classification units containing both high/medium constraint and low constraint features; f) Agricultural/pasture lands with evidence of hydrological function; g) Areas providing candidate/unconfirmed species-at-risk habitat or significant wildlife habitat; and h) Headwater drainage features with a “Conservation” or “Mitigation” classification. Page 58 Courtice Transit-Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan 12 4.3.12 The presence and precise delineation of Moderate Constraint Areas shall be determined through an Environmental Impact Study prepared as part of development applications in accordance with the policies of this Secondary Plan and the Clarington Official Plan. 4.3.13 The Subwatershed Study referenced in Policy 4.3.11 also identifies “Low Constraint Areas”, comprising features in which development intrusion is not restricted by existing policies and regulations. It is encouraged that these features be incorporated into development plans where possible to avoid net loss of natural cover. 4.4 Urban Forest 4.4.1 Together, new development and public realm improvements shall establish an urban tree canopy throughout the Secondary Plan area to minimize the heat island effect, provide shade and wind cover, support biodiversity, and contribute to a green and attractive environment. 4.4.2 All private development applications shall be supported by landscape plans that demonstrate how the development will contribute to the urban forest, improve the health and diversity of the natural environment, support other local plant and animal species, and further enhance the connectivity of the built environment to natural heritage features and hydrologically sensitive features. 4.4.3 Through development applications, the planting of new trees shall be required in public spaces and private spaces to achieve benefits relating to microclimate, wildlife habitats, hydrology and scenic quality. 4.4.4 A diversity of tree and shrub species shall be planted in parks and along right-of- ways to provide a healthy and more robust tree and shrub inventory that is less prone to insects and diseases. The selection of tree and shrub species within the Secondary Plan area will contribute to the Municipality’s species diversity objectives. 4.4.5 New trees generally shall be native species, non-invasive, tolerant of expected conditions and, where possible, of the largest size and maturity that the planting location permits. 4.5 Energy 4.5.1 The Municipality shall work with appropriate partners to study the feasibility of a low carbon thermal energy network, commonly known as a district energy system, for the Secondary Plan area. Where a district energy system has been established, new development within the Mixed Use Core, including transit facilities and municipal buildings, will be required to connect to the district energy system. 4.5.2 Where a district energy system is planned, new development within the Mixed Use Core, including transit facilities and municipal buildings, may be required to be district energy ready, subject to the Municipality establishing district energy ready guidelines. Page 59 Courtice Transit-Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan 13 4.5.3 The Municipality will consider strategies for facilitating low carbon thermal energy technologies, which may permit the repurposing of mechanical space to other uses. 4.5.4 New development outside the Mixed Use Core shall consider and integrate, where feasible, the district energy system. Should connection to the district energy system not be feasible, new development shall consider the use of other low carbon thermal energy technologies such as geo -exchange, wastewater energy, and heat recovery from sources such as data centres and industry to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. 4.5.5 New development shall consider and integrate where feasible: a) Decentralized on-site renewable energy generation such as solar photovoltaic (PV) panels and energy storage, such as battery storage, to manage peak electricity demand, reduce emissions, and strengthen energy resilience; and b) Backup power for protection from area-wide power outages, including in residential buildings, as informed by guidelines developed by the Municipality. 4.6 Green Development 4.6.1 Development is strongly encouraged to: a) Meet high standards for energy efficiency and sustainability in building design and construction, exceeding the energy performance criteria of the Ontario Building Code. b) Utilize energy efficient lighting and appliances, passive building standards and high-performance building envelopes to reduce the amount of energy required to heat and cool buildings. c) Incorporate window shading or canopy systems to reduce glass reflections and save on cooling loads in the summer. d) Incorporate energy and water conservation measures, including consideration for renewable and/or alternative energy systems, such as solar panels. Individual buildings shall be encouraged to accommodate solar panels, a green roof or high albedo surfaces, o r a combination of these. e) Meet high standards for the use of low-impact development strategies and minimize impermeable surfaces, to aid in stormwater infiltration. f) Utilize water-efficient building design and practices in all new buildings, including measures such as ultra-low flow fixtures, dual flush toilets and rainwater harvesting. g) Integrate strategies to mitigate heat island effects, such as: i. Green roof and cool roof strategies that use high albedo materials to reduce heat gain; Page 60 Courtice Transit-Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan 14 ii. The strategic use of deciduous trees to help with evapotranspiration and shading of buildings, sidewalks and hard surface areas in summer; iii. Solar access in winter; and iv. Light-coloured paving materials with an initial solar reflectance of at least 0.33 at installation or a solar reflectance index of at least 29. h) Apply designs, methods and materials that reduce embodied carbon emissions, such as: i. Using lower-carbon methods and materials such as mass timber, low-carbon concrete and biogenic insulation; ii. Adaptively reusing existing buildings; and iii. Repurposing on-site materials. 5 Land Use and Built Form 5.1 Objectives 5.1.1 Concentrate a mix of uses in a high-density format close to the future GO Station with direct connections to the station that encourage residents, workers, and visitors to use transit for daily trips. 5.1.2 Achieve a minimum density of 150 people and jobs per gross hectare within the Protected Major Transit Station Area. 5.1.3 Plan enough housing to accommodate a diverse population of approximately 29,000. 5.1.4 Ensure the development of mixed-use and employment areas provides opportunities for a variety of employment types and forms, including office, institutional, light industrial, retail and services. 5.1.5 Accommodate a minimum of 8,000 jobs and achieve a ratio of approximately one job for every four residents. 5.1.6 Ensure office and industrial uses are strategically located to provide good visibility and convenient access from major roads, including prominent exposure along Highway 401. 5.1.7 Ensure compatibility among the different land uses planned for CTOC. 5.2 General Policies 5.2.1 The land use designations are identified in Schedule A. Minor alterations to Schedule A may occur without amendment to this Secondary Plan through the development approval process provided such alterations are in conformity with the Clarington Official Plan and the intent of this Secondary Plan is maintained. Page 61 Courtice Transit-Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan 15 5.2.2 Minimum densities for the residential and mixed-use designations in CTOC, as set out below, have been established to achieve: a) A minimum density of 150 people and jobs per gross hectare within the Protected Major Transit Station Area is achieved over time; and b) A diversity of housing and employment opportunities are accommodated. 5.2.3 The minimum density for each residential and mixed -use land use designation shall be a net density and shall apply to each area bounded by a public road, Environmental Protection Area and/or other land use designation . 5.2.4 The following uses are permitted in all land use designations, excluding Environmental Protection Areas, in this Secondary Plan: a) A use which is accessory to a permitted use; b) Public utilities, including water, wastewater, stormwater infrastructure; and, c) Institutional uses and public facilities. 5.2.5 Development adjacent or close to the rail corridor shall be subject to the Federation of Canadian Municipalities and Railway Association of Canada Guidelines for New Development in Proximity to Railway Operations (2013) or successor guidelines or policies adopted by Council. 5.2.6 Generally, high-occupancy uses, including residential, commercial and institutional, shall be set back a minimum of 30 metres from the rail corridor, measured horizontally and vertically, with an earthen berm or crash wall located within the setback. 5.2.7 Development within 300 metres of a Metrolinx Rail Corridor may be subject to the Metrolinx Adjacent Development Guidelines - GO Transit Heavy Rail Corridors and Metrolinx Overbuild Development Guidelines - GO Transit Heavy Rail Corridors. 5.2.8 A setback of 14 metres will apply to all future developments that occur adjacent to the Highway 401 and Highway 418 rights-of-way in accordance with Ministry of Transportation policy and will be measured from the ultimate highway limit. 5.2.9 The Municipality may require new development to incorporate appropriate measures to mitigate any adverse impacts from existing or planned non - residential uses on residential and other sensitive uses. 5.3 Mixed Use Core Planned Function 5.3.1 The planned function of the Mixed Use Core area is to accommodate a broad mix of residential, commercial and institutional uses at high residential and employment densities. The lands in this designation are intended to have the greatest intensity of use. Page 62 Courtice Transit-Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan 16 Permitted Uses 5.3.2 The following uses are permitted within this designation: a) Residential; b) A full range of non-residential uses, including but not limited to commercial, offices, retail, restaurants, places of entertainment, financial institutions, personal and business services, hotels, conference facilities and commercial schools; and c) Institutional uses, including but not limited to public schools, colleges and universities, community centres, cultural facilities, libraries, day cares and places of worship. 5.3.3 Notwithstanding policy 5.3.2, large format retail and institutional uses shall generally only be permitted on lots fronting Courtice Road, Townline Road, Baseline Road and Trulls Road, unless they are located above or below the ground floor. 5.3.4 Office or institutional uses shall occupy a minimum of 10% of the total gross floor area of all buildings located on each block, or portion of a block, located within the area identified as “Areas Where Office Uses Required” on Schedule A. 5.3.5 Buildings located in the area identified for “Commercial Frontage” on Schedule A shall contain retail, restaurants or commercial services for a minimum of 70% of the frontage on the ground floor facing Street C and Farmington Drive with main entrances that front onto adjacent public sidewalks. Professional offices shall be discouraged on ground floors along these streets. Building Types 5.3.6 Permitted building types within this designation include: a) Apartment building, including an apartment building with grade -related units on the ground floor; b) Mixed-use building with commercial or institutional uses on the first and potentially second floors; c) Office or commercial building; d) Institutional building; and e) Stacked townhouses, subject to Policy 5.3.7. 5.3.7 Stacked townhouses shall be permitted provided they: a) Do not occupy more than 20% of a block; b) Are a coordinated and contiguous element of a larger high -density development that achieves the minimum density in Policy 8.3.10 and supports the urban design objectives of this plan; and c) Do not front or flank an Arterial Road. Page 63 Courtice Transit-Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan 17 Heights and Density 5.3.8 The minimum height shall be 4 storeys, except institutional buildings, which shall have a minimum height of 2 storeys, and buildings fronting Arterial Roads, which shall have a minimum height of 6 storeys. 5.3.9 The maximum height shall generally be 40 storeys. 5.3.10 The minimum density in the Mixed Use Core shall be 325 units per net hectare. Transit Facilities Zone 5.3.11 The Transit Facilities Zone identified on Schedule A within the Mixed Use Core is the preferred location for transit facilities related to the GO Station, including commuter parking, passenger pick-up and drop-off areas, bus terminals and the GO Station building itself. Such transit facilities associated with the GO Station shall not be subject to the minimum height and density requirements of this Plan. 5.3.12 The siting and design of transit facilities shall anticipate mixed-use development in the Transit Facilities Zone, and shall generally be compatible with residential, commercial and institutional uses. 5.3.13 If a stand-alone parking structure is proposed within the Transit Facilities Zone, it shall be located east of Farmington Drive and should be set back a sufficient distance from Townline Road and Farmington Drive to allow the structure to be wrapped by future commercial or residential development. South Core Redevelopment Area 5.3.14 The area identified on Schedule A as “South Core Redevelopment Area” is an established industrial park, where the transition to high-density development accommodating a mix of uses, as envisaged by this plan, will require careful planning when applications are prepared and reviewed. Issues of land use compatibility, the location and phasing of community facilities, and cost-sharing for such facilities as well as for other infrastructure improvements will need to be addressed in each application, and coopera tion and coordination among landowners will be required. 5.3.15 A South Core Implementation Strategy prepared to the Municipality’s satisfaction shall be required prior to the approval of zoning bylaw amendments in the South Core Redevelopment Area. The Implementation Strategy shall be prepared through a consultative process that seeks to engage landowners in the area. The Implementation Strategy shall: a) Confirm the location and configuration of a future elementary school and an adjacent neighbourhood park with a minimum area of one hectare; b) Identify the potential location of parkettes or other publicly accessible open spaces to be included in future plans for individual sites; c) Confirm the alignment and land requirement for an active transportation connection between a future tunnel under the rail corridor and Baseline Road; Page 64 Courtice Transit-Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan 18 d) Include an infrastructure master plan addressing road and servicing improvements and stormwater management facilities required to support the development permitted under this secondary plan; e) Include a phasing plan and consideration of existing uses (land use compatibility); and f) Identify the financial mechanisms, including but not limited to a cost -sharing agreement, and any other tools to be used to ensure the above shared infrastructure and amenities are implemented. 5.4 Mixed Use Transition Area Planned Function 5.4.1 The Mixed Use Transition Area, located at the edge of the Mixed Use Core, is intended to accommodate a broad mix of residential, commercial and institutional uses at generally high residential and employment densities and in forms that provide a transition between the more intense Mixed Use Core Area and the planned lower-scale neighbourhoods in CTOC. Permitted Uses 5.4.2 The following uses are permitted uses within this designation: a) Residential; b) A full range of non-residential uses shall be permitted, including but not limited to commercial, offices, retail, restaurants, places of entertainment, financial institutions, personal and business services, hotels, conference facilities and commercial schools; and c) Institutional uses, including but not limited to public schools, colleges and universities, community centres, cultural facilities, libraries, day cares and places of worship. 5.4.3 Notwithstanding policy 5.4.2, large format retail and institutional uses shall generally only be permitted on lots fronting Courtice Road, Townline Road, Baseline Road and Trulls Road, unless they are located above or below the ground floor. 5.4.4 Retail, restaurants and commercial service uses are encouraged on the ground floor of buildings at the intersections of two Arterial Roads, two Collector Roads or an Arterial Road and a Collector Road. Development is encouraged to protect for these non-residential uses on the ground floor. Building Types 5.4.5 Permitted building types within this designation include: a) Apartment building, including an apartment building with grade -related units on the ground floor; b) Mixed-use building with commercial or institutional uses on the ground floor; Page 65 Courtice Transit-Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan 19 c) Office building; d) Institutional building; e) Stacked townhouses; and f) Street townhouses, subject to Policy 5.4.6. 5.4.6 Street townhouses shall be permitted provided they: a) Do not occupy more than 30% of a block if the block has frontage on an Arterial Road or Collector Road; b) Are a coordinated and contiguous element of a larger high -density development that achieves the minimum density in Policy 5.4.9 and supports the urban design objectives of this plan; and c) Do not front or flank an Arterial Road. Heights and Density 5.4.7 The minimum height shall be 4 storeys, except: a) Institutional buildings, which shall have a minimum height of 2 storeys b) Street townhouses as per policy 5.4.6, which shall have a minimum height of 3 storeys; and c) Buildings fronting Courtice Road or within 100 metres of the Prominent Intersection on Trulls Road, which shall have a minimum height of 6 storeys. 5.4.8 The maximum height shall generally be 25 storeys, except buildings adjacent to a Medium Density Residential or Low Density Residential area, which shall have a maximum height of 10 storeys. 5.4.9 The minimum density shall be 100 units per net hectare. 5.5 Medium Density Residential Planned Function 5.5.1 Medium Density Residential neighbourhoods are planned to accommodate a variety of mostly low-rise housing types in a compact form, as well as neighbourhood-oriented commercial amenities and community facilities. Permitted Uses 5.5.2 The following uses are permitted uses within this designation: a) Residential; b) Other uses in accordance with Clarington Official Plan Policies 9.3.1 and 9.3.3; and c) Small-scale retail, restaurant and commercial service uses provided they are located on a Collector or Arterial Road and each establishment has a gross leasable floor area no greater than 250 square metres. Page 66 Courtice Transit-Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan 20 Building Types 5.5.3 Permitted building types within this designation include: a) Apartment buildings; b) All forms of townhouses; and c) Fourplexes and triplexes. Heights and Density 5.5.4 The minimum height shall be 3 storeys, except buildings adjacent to a Low Density Residential area, which may have a minimum height of 2 storeys, and buildings fronting Courtice Road, which shall have a minimum height of 4 storeys. 5.5.5 The maximum height shall be 4 storeys, except buildings fronting an Arterial Road which shall have a maximum height of 6 storeys. 5.5.6 The minimum density in the Medium Density Residential area shall be 45 units per net hectare, except on lots fronting Courtice Road, which shall have a minimum density of 60 units per net hectare. 5.6 Low Density Residential Planned Function 5.6.1 Low Density Residential neighbourhoods are planned to accommodate a variety of low-rise housing and community facilities. Permitted Uses 5.6.2 The following uses are permitted uses within this designation: a) Residential; and b) Other uses such as small scale service, neighbourhood retail commercial uses and home-based occupation. Building Types 5.6.3 Permitted building types within this designation include: a) Detached and semi-detached houses; b) Street townhouses and stacked townhouses; and c) Fourplexes, triplexes and duplexes. Heights and Density 5.6.4 The maximum height shall be 3 storeys. 5.6.5 The minimum density in the Low Density Residential area shall be 25 units per net hectare. Page 67 Courtice Transit-Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan 21 5.6.6 Private streets and private Rear Lanes are not permitted within the Low Density Residential designation. 5.7 Business District Planned Function 5.7.1 The Business District is planned to accommodate primarily a mix of commercial, light industrial and institutional uses in compact forms. Permitted Uses 5.7.2 The following uses are permitted uses within this designation: a) Offices; b) Hotels; c) Commercial and technical schools; d) Research and development; e) Studios and workshops; f) Manufacturing; g) Communications and information technology development; h) Media production facilities; i) Colleges and universities; and j) Retail and business services, provided they do not occupy more than 50% of the gross floor area on a site. 5.7.3 Light industrial uses, including research and development, workshops and manufacturing, shall be wholly enclosed within a building, with no outside storage. 5.7.4 Warehousing and distribution facilities shall not be permitted. Heights and Density 5.7.5 The minimum height shall be 2 storeys. 5.7.6 The maximum height shall be 10 storeys. 5.7.7 Development shall achieve a minimum Floor Space Index (FSI) of 1.0. 5.8 Light Industrial Planned Function 5.8.1 The Light Industrial area is intended to contain a mix of employment uses in a prestige business park setting where buildings and landscapes are designed to a high standard to attract businesses. Permitted Uses 5.8.2 The following uses are permitted uses within this designation: Page 68 Courtice Transit-Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan 22 a) Manufacturing; b) Research and development associated with manufacturing; c) Warehousing and distribution facilities; and d) Offices and retail associated with any of the above permitted uses. 5.8.3 Industrial uses shall be wholly enclosed in a building, with no outside storage. 5.8.4 Notwithstanding policies 5.8.2 and 5.8.3, the existing uses on the properties located at 1598 and a portion of 1604 Baseline Road located south of the rail corridor (Auto Wrecking Yard), as of the date of adoption of this Plan, shall be permitted to continue until the use ceases. Heights and Density 5.8.5 The maximum height shall be 4 storeys. 5.9 General Industrial Planned Function 5.9.1 The General Industrial land use is intended to contain a mix of employment uses in an industrial park setting where there is greater flexibility regarding how sites are configured and development is designed. Permitted Uses 5.9.2 The following uses are permitted uses within this designation: a) Manufacturing; b) Research and development associated with manufacturing; c) Warehousing and distribution facilities; and d) Offices and retail associated with any of the above permitted uses. 5.9.3 Outside storage may be permitted, provided it is screened from public view and does not occupy more than 25% of the lot area. Height and Density 5.9.4 The maximum height shall be 4 storeys. 5.10 Environmental Protection Area Planned Function 5.10.1 Lands designated Environmental Protection Area include natural heritage features, hydrologically sensitive features, lands within the regulatory flood plain of a watercourse, headwater drainage features with a “Protection” classification and hazard lands associated with valley systems, including slope and erosion hazards. These lands contribute to the Municipality’s Natural Heritage System and are intended to be protected. Page 69 Courtice Transit-Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan 23 Permitted Uses 5.10.2 In accordance with the Clarington Official Plan policies on the Natural Heritage System, development and site alteration is prohibited, except the following: a) Forest, fish and wildlife management; b) Conservation and flood or erosion control projects, but only if they have been demonstrated to be necessary in the public interest after all alternatives have been considered c) Transportation, infrastructure and utilities, but only if the need for the project has been demonstrated by an Environmental Assessment, there is no reasonable alternative, and it is supported by a project specific Environmental Impact Study; and d) Low impact recreation facilities, including but not limited to trails, pathways, pedestrian bridges, lookouts and seating areas, to the satisfaction of the Conservation Authority and the Municipality of Clarington. 5.11 Utility 5.11.1 The lands designated as Utility within the Secondary Plan contain the Canadian Pacific Kansas City railway corridor. 5.11.2 Expansion of the Utility designation to accommodate modifications to the railway corridor shall not require an amendment to this plan. 5.12 Special Study Area 5.12.1 Schedule A identifies a Special Study Area where engineering analysis will be undertaken as part of the Clarington Transportation Master Plan. This study will evaluate the feasibility of a grade-separated crossing at Trulls Road over the rail corridor, including its potential impacts on adjacent properties and nearby intersections. 5.12.2 Existing uses in and adjacent to the Special Study Area, including additions and renovations to existing buildings, may continue. New development in the Special Study Area, however, is prohibited until the engineering study is completed and its recommendations regarding the crossing are approved . 5.12.3 If the engineering study determines that modifications to the road network within the Special Study Area are required, including the elimination or relocation of an intersection, the study will assess the transportation impacts of such changes and confirm if an Official Plan Amendment is required to implement the modifications. Page 70 Courtice Transit-Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan 24 6 Urban Design 6.1 Objectives 6.1.1 Create a vibrant public realm that feels safe, comfortable and visually pleasing and supports economic development. 6.1.2 Design spaces that are accessible for people of all ages and abilities. 6.1.3 Facilitate street life, casual social interaction and community gatherings. 6.1.4 Support healthy living environments and a high quality of life for residents. 6.1.5 Ensure compatibility between developments of varying scales and forms. 6.1.6 Establish a distinct identify for CTOC through the design of open spaces, streetscapes and buildings. 6.2 General Policies 6.2.1 The Urban Design and Sustainability Guidelines appended to this Plan shall be used as guidance in the interpretation and implementation of this Secondary Plan’s policies. 6.2.2 Development shall contribute to the creation of a vibrant public realm that feels safe, comfortable and visually pleasing, encourages active transportation, and contributes to a distinct identity for CTOC. Buildings shall be oriented to and have their main entrance on a street. 6.2.3 Development that backs onto a public street generally shall not be permitted. 6.3 Placemaking and Streetscapes 6.3.1 Public art is encouraged to be incorporated into private development to enhance the pedestrian experience and contribute to the area’s identity. 6.3.2 Development shall enhance the experience of the community’s natural setting by framing views to natural features and providing pedestrian connections to parks and Environmental Protection Areas. 6.3.3 Gateways and Prominent Intersections identified in Schedule A represent special locations within the Secondary Plan area which will support a distinct sense of place and are subject to enhanced public realm treatments. Gateways and Prominent Intersections are to be designed in accordance with the Clarington Official Plan. 6.3.4 Prominent Intersections shall serve as community focal points through building height, massing and orientation, architectural treatment and materials, and landscaping. 6.3.5 Gateways and Prominent Intersections should include distinctive landscape and streetscape treatments, including but not limited to planters, public art, special paving, signage, and street furniture that enhance the public realm and mark entry points into the Secondary Plan area. Page 71 Courtice Transit-Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan 25 6.3.6 New development or redevelopment adjacent to a Gateway should be designed to enhance the gateway through: a) Building orientation and massing that prioritizes street frontages and pedestrian access; b) Façade treatments and architectural elements to create visual interest; c) Continuity and connectivity between the public and private realms for pedestrians; and d) Consistent landscaping within the private realm including consideration for trees, seating, and shade structures. 6.3.7 Streetscape design elements within the public right -of-way should be coordinated with and enhance private development sites adjacent to Gateway and Prominent Intersection locations, to create a cohesive visual identity. 6.4 Building Siting and Design 6.4.1 The following shall apply to development in the Mixed Use Core and Mixed Use Transition areas: a) Where retail and other street-related commercial uses are proposed, buildings generally shall form a consistent streetwall that frames the pedestrian environment. Front setbacks along retail streets generally shall be 1-5 metres to accommodate retail displays, street furniture and restaurant patios. b) On streets lined mainly with residential uses, front setbacks generally shall be 3-5 metres to provide for front yards, gardens or patios, and stairs. c) Commercial frontages should contribute to a safe and inviting public realm with frequent entrances, weather protection and extensive glazing on the ground floor. d) Tall residential or mixed-use buildings over 10 storeys generally shall take a podium and tower form to appropriately frame streets and open spaces and contribute to a comfortable public realm while limiting shadow impacts. The following massing standards generally shall apply: i. Podiums shall have a minimum height of 3 storeys and a maximum height of 6 storeys. ii. Residential towers shall have a maximum floorplate of 850 square metres. iii. Residential towers partially or entirely facing one another shall be separated by a minimum of 30 metres. Towers not facing one another generally shall have a minimum separation of 25 metres. iv. Residential towers shall be set back from the edges of podiums. Page 72 Courtice Transit-Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan 26 e) Tall office buildings shall not be subject to the above massing requirements. Appropriate separation distances between office towers shall be determined at the time of development applications for such uses. f) Mid-rise buildings of 5-10 storeys shall limit the adverse impact of their mass on the public realm and the pedestrian experience by generally limiting their length to no more than 70 metres, articulating their facades, varying materials and incorporating upper floor stepbacks. Stepbacks of at least three metres generally shall occur at the 6th storey along Local Roads and at the 8th storey along Collector Roads and Arterial Roads. g) Parking for residential uses shall be provided within the same block, and development shall limit the negative impacts of parking and loading on the public realm. Parking and loading generally shall be located within the building envelope in lands designated Mixed Use Core and Mixed Use Transition Area. h) Entrances to parking and servicing areas generally shall be on Local Roads, mews and/or Rear Lanes and should be consolidated to maximize and accentuate building frontages and/or front yards and minimize the number of curb cuts required. Shared driveways a nd parking ramps between properties shall be encouraged. i) Loading and service areas generally shall be enclosed within a building and located in the interior of a development block. Where loading and servicing is visible at the rear or side of a building, it shall be screened. j) Where underground parking is not feasible, parking may be located within a podium, above the ground floor, provided the podium is designed to look like an occupied building with windows. k) Front patios for ground-floor residential units, where appropriate, shall be raised or otherwise appropriately screened and designed to provide for privacy and a transition between the public and private realms. 6.4.2 To ensure development in Low Density and Medium Density Residential areas contributes to attractive streetscapes and an inviting, comfortable pedestrian realm, the following policies shall apply: a) Surface parking lots for multi-unit buildings in Medium Density Residential and Low Density Residential areas, excluding street townhouses but including stacked townhouses, may be permitted provided it is located at the rear of buildings, accessed from a shared driveway at the side of the building or, preferably, from a rear laneway. Off -street surface parking shall not be located between the building and the street. b) Blocks with a concentration of townhouses and/or lots containing other housing types that are less than 9 metres wide will be encouraged to incorporate Rear Lanes. c) Parking for street townhouses, fourplexes, triplexes, duplexes, semi- detached houses and detached houses that front Courtice Road, Trulls Page 73 Courtice Transit-Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan 27 Road, Townline Road, Street B and the east side of Street E, as identified in Schedule C, shall be accessed from another municipal street, Rear Lane, or private street. d) Garages generally shall not extend more than two metres from the front wall of the house. e) Single garages and double garages with living space directly above them may extend partially beyond the front wall of the house , in accordance with the Zoning By-law. f) The width of a driveway generally shall correspond with the width of the garage, although in the case of single garages, a wider driveway may be permitted where it does not prevent soft landscaping in the front yard. g) Buildings on corner lots shall have articulated facades facing both streets. h) Front and exterior side yard porches shall be encouraged. i) Air conditioning units, utility meters and similar features should not be visible from the public realm (street/sidewalk) and should be well integrated into a building massing, recessed and screened. 6.4.3 The following shall apply to the Business District and the Light Industrial and General Industrial areas: a) Buildings shall contribute to a consistent streetscape along Baseline Road through the use of setbacks, landscaped front yards, well -designed buildings and the orientation of main entrances to the streets. b) Buildings that occupy at least 40% of the lot width shall be encouraged. c) Buildings on corner lots generally shall be oriented on the corner towards both streets. d) A minimum of 20% of the site area shall be landscaped. e) Parking lots generally shall be located to the interior side and/or rear of buildings. A limited amount of visitor or accessible parking may be located in the front yard. f) Service and loading areas shall be located at the rear of buildings and appropriately screened from public view. 7 Housing 7.1 Objectives 7.1.1 Build enough housing to accommodate a diverse population of approximately 29,000. 7.1.2 Ensure residential neighbourhoods and mixed-use areas within CTOC include a mix of dwelling types and sizes to meet the needs of individuals and families through all stages of life. Page 74 Courtice Transit-Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan 28 7.1.3 Encourage the provision and retention of affordable housing and rental housing for low and moderately low income households. 7.1.4 Integrate supportive housing to meet a spectrum of needs. 7.2 General Policies 7.2.1 CTOC is planned to include a wide range of housing types and tenure types, including market ownership and rental units, as well as affordable housing units in accordance with the policies of the Clarington Official Plan and the Durham Region Official Plan (as applicable). 7.2.2 New development shall provide a range of unit sizes, in terms of number of bedrooms, within multiple-unit buildings. Generally, a minimum of 25 percent of units shall have two or more bedrooms. 7.2.3 The above minimum requirements for two - and three-bedroom units may be reduced where development is providing: a) Social housing or other publicly funded/subsidized housing; or b) Housing to meet identified specialized needs which do not require multi- bedroom units such as for health care institutions or residences owned and operated by a post-secondary institution. 7.2.4 In Low Density Residential and Medium Density Residential, development is encouraged to include additional dwelling units. 7.3 Affordable Housing 7.3.1 Affordable housing, including community housing, supportive housing and other types of subsidized non-market housing units, are encouraged to be integrated within neighbourhoods and combined in developments that also provide market housing to deliver opportunities for a range of housing tenures and prices that support diversity. 7.3.2 The Municipality will collaborate with community housing providers, including but not limited to, the Region of Durham, to encourage a supply of subsidized non - market housing units to be included within the Secondary Plan Area. 7.3.3 To support the provision of affordable housing units, the Municipality will explore other potential incentives, such as reduced application fees, grants and loans. The Municipality will also encourage the Region (as applicable) to consider further increasing financial incentives for affordable housing. 7.3.4 The Municipality may explore opportunities for inclusionary zoning in compliance with Provincial regulations. 7.3.5 The co-location of affordable housing with community service facilities and vertically integrated community hubs are encouraged. 7.3.6 The Municipality may prioritize development applications that include affordable housing units. Page 75 Courtice Transit-Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan 29 8 Parks and Community Facilities 8.1 Objectives 8.1.1 Locate parks, elementary schools and basic commercial amenities within a 10 - minute walk for most residents. 8.1.2 Design buildings, infrastructure and open spaces to mitigate the impacts of severe storms, flooding, droughts and the broader impacts of climate change. 8.1.3 Design parks and school sites to incorporate low-impact development features for stormwater management. 8.1.4 Ensure parks and other open spaces are highly visible and accessible. 8.1.5 Locate parks to maximize the number of residents within a five-minute walk. 8.1.6 Provide parks of a sufficient size and configuration to accommodate a range of potential recreation facilities for residents of all ages and abilities. 8.1.7 Support the timely delivery of elementary schools and indoor recreation facilities within the community. 8.1.8 Integrate public art into the design of parks, streets and other public spaces. 8.2 General Policies 8.2.1 The dedication of lands for parkland shall be in accordance with the Planning Act. 8.2.2 Parkland shall be integrated and connected into a broader public realm network that also includes civic/institutional uses, streets, mid-block connections, trails and privately owned publicly-accessible open spaces. 8.2.3 The design and programming of parks shall be guided by the Municipality’s Parks, Recreation and Culture Master Plan and other applicable guidelines. 8.2.4 The park system as a whole shall provide a variety of opportunities for passive and active recreation and be comprised of well-designed spaces that contribute to CTOC’s identity. 8.2.5 Where feasible, parks should be designed to incorporate low -impact development features to manage stormwater. 8.2.6 Parks generally shall be bordered by public roads, Environmental Protection Areas, schools, and other community facilities. Residential and commercial uses backing onto parks shall be minimized and private access shall not be permitted. 8.2.7 Environmental Protection Areas, associated vegetation protection zones and stormwater management areas shall not be conveyed to satisfy parkland dedication requirements under the Planning Act. 8.2.8 The following types of parks are planned in CTOC: a) Special Park – a central multi-purpose gathering and recreation space serving all of CTOC and the Courtice community more broadly; Page 76 Courtice Transit-Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan 30 b) Neighbourhood Parks and Parkettes – traditional green spaces to meet the daily passive and active recreation needs of residents in the surrounding neighbourhood; c) Urban Parks and Squares – smaller, multi-purpose open spaces generally designed for passive uses but which also may accommodate programmed events and activities. 8.3 Special Park 8.3.1 The Special Park identified in Schedules A and B will be a central gathering place for residents, workers and visitors in CTOC and for the larger Courtice community. It shall have a minimum area of 2.5 hectares and be bounded by public streets on at least three sides. 8.3.2 The Special Park shall be designed to accommodate a range of civic, cultural and recreational activities within a heavily treed landscape. Grassed and hardscaped areas shall support special events and day-to-day uses. 8.3.3 The Special Park may include outdoor recreation facilities that are not land- consumptive, such as a basketball courts, tennis courts, a skating rink, a playground and/or a splashpad. Larger facilities, such as baseball diamonds, soccer pitches and cricket ovals, will not be appropriate. A small dog park may be accommodated. 8.4 Neighbourhood Parks and Parkettes 8.4.1 Schedule B identifies four Major Neighbourhood Parks intended to be central places for recreation and gathering for the future neighbourhoods surrounding them. The precise configuration and size of each of these parks shall be determined in plans of subdivision. Minor changes to their configuration and size shall not require an amendment to this Plan; however, their minimum sizes shall generally be as follows: • West Neighbourhood Park: 2.5 ha • North Neighbourhood Park: 2.0 ha • East Neighbourhood Park: 1.5 ha • Central Neighbourhood Park: 1.5 ha 8.4.2 In addition to the Major Neighbourhood Parks delineated on Schedule B, other Neighbourhood Parks and Parkettes will be required to meet the needs of residents, give neighbourhoods a strong green character and enhance CTOC’s natural environment. The location, size and configuration of these parks shall be determined at the time of development applications, guided by the general locations identified in Schedule B. 8.4.3 A Neighbourhood Park, notwithstanding the Municipality’s general standards, shall have an area greater than 1.0 hectares, and a Parkette shall be 0.5-1.0 hectare. Page 77 Courtice Transit-Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan 31 8.4.4 To ensure Neighbourhood Parks are an accessible and prominent feature of the neighbourhood, a minimum of 50% of their boundaries, excluding any portion of a boundary abutting an Environmental Protection Area or stormwater management facility, shall front a public street. Where a Neighbourhood Park abuts a school, the minimum 50% street frontage requirement may be reduced, provided the park has generous frontage on one street and public access from a second street, at minimum. 8.5 Urban Parks and Squares 8.5.1 To complement parks with additional space for gathering and landscaping, Urban Parks and Squares shall be encouraged in CTOC. Urban Parks and Squares may vary in size but generally will be less than 0.5 hectares. 8.5.2 The location, size and function of Urban Parks and Squares shall be determined at the time of development review and approval. 8.5.3 Urban Parks and Squares shall be defined by adjacent buildings and have at least one edge abutting a public right-of-way. 8.5.4 Urban Parks and Squares may be publicly owned or privately owned but, in either case, shall be publicly accessible. Publicly owned Urban Parks and Squares shall count toward a development’s parkland contribution. Privately owned Urban Parks and Squares may count toward parkland dedication where it is unencumbered by underground parking and there is an agreement with the landowner that the space will be maintained in perpetuity by the landowner. 8.5.5 Urban Parks and Squares shall be designed to offer a space for respite, outdoor dining and special events. Generally, they shall feature lighting, seating areas, trees and soft landscaping, low-impact development features, public art, or other amenities to encourage casual use and gathering. 8.6 Schools 8.6.1 Approximately six (6) elementary schools and two (2) secondary schools are planned in CTOC. The general locations for schools are identified on Schedules A and B. Notwithstanding the preferred locations identified on Schedules A and B, schools may be located elsewhere in the Secondary Plan area, and additional school sites added, without amendment to the Plan . 8.6.2 Should an alternative site be selected for a school, or a school site not be required, the lands identified for the preferred site shall be developed in accordance with the policies for the underlying land use designation. Final locations and configurations for schools will be determined through the review of development applications, in coordination with the school boards. 8.6.3 All elementary school sites, wherever possible, shall abut a park or other usable green space to provide areas of shared amenity. 8.6.4 The size and configuration of each school site shall be to the satisfaction of the School Board and the Municipality. If a school site includes a child care centre, Page 78 Courtice Transit-Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan 32 the site shall be appropriately sized and configured to address the needs of the school and the child care centre. 8.6.5 The sharing of sites by two elementary schools or a school and another community facility, such as a child care centre, shall be strongly encouraged. 8.6.6 Shared parking between a school and an adjacent or nearby municipal facility or other institutional use shall be strongly encouraged. 8.6.7 Schools required within the designated Mixed Use Core and Mixed Use Transition areas are strongly encouraged to be located within the podium of larger mixed-use buildings or take a compact, multi-storey form to optimize their sites. Such schools shall provide outdoor play space, which may be located at- grade or on a rooftop and shared between the school and an adjacent or nearby municipal facility or other institutional use. 8.6.8 Elementary schools should be located on Collector Roads or at the intersection of Collector Roads and Local Roads with a minimum right -of-way width of 20 metres. Road connections should facilitate easy and safe movement of school buses and avoid the need for students to cross major roads. 8.6.9 Secondary schools shall be located on Arterial Roads. In no case will a school have access from Courtice Road. 8.6.10 Schools sites should be designed to encourage walking and cycling and should be connected to the larger active transportation network of sidewalks, bike lanes and multi-use paths. 8.7 Other Community Facilities 8.7.1 Community facilities such as libraries, recreation centres, child care centres, and fire, ambulance and police stations will be required to meet the needs of residents and workers in the area. The Municipality shall monitor CTOC’s growth to ensure such facilities are provided in a timely manner and may require a community services and facilities needs assessment with development applications. 8.7.2 The preferred location for a library, a recreation centre and major cultural facilities is identified in Schedule B as Preferred Location for Other Central Community Facilities, where such facilities will reinforce the civic and cultural heart of CTOC. If such a facility is located in the Special Park, it shall not occupy more than 20% of the park area, including associated parking. 8.7.3 Community facilities generally shall be: a) Designed to meet the requirements of the City and public agencies, boards and commissions; b) Located in highly visible locations with strong pedestrian, cycling and transit connections for convenient access; and c) Have prominent pedestrian entrances on the main building façade fronting onto a public street. Page 79 Courtice Transit-Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan 33 8.7.4 Community facilities are encouraged, where appropriate, to promote partnerships and optimize the use of space, considering the following measures: a) Providing for flexible, accessible, multi-purpose spaces that can be programmed in different ways and be adapted over time to meet the varied needs of different user groups; b) Supporting the creation of community hubs and co -located facilities; c) Exploring alternative delivery models, such as partnerships with non -profit organizations; d) Co-locating within mixed-use buildings; and e) Integrating and coordinating programs. 9 Cultural Heritage 9.1 Objectives 9.1.1 Recover and protect Indigenous and other archaeological resources. 9.1.2 Conserve and interpret significant built heritage resources and facilitate their integration with surrounding land uses, open spaces and built form. 9.1.3 Ensure opportunities for views and access to sites of cultural significance, as appropriate. 9.1.4 Interpret the area’s cultural heritage, including its Indigenous history, within the public realm. 9.1.5 Identify and protect view corridors and vistas to Lake Ontario down streets and from public spaces, where possible. 9.2 Policies 9.2.1 The conservation and enhancement of significant cultural heritage resources shall be consistent with the policies of the Clarington Official Plan and all relevant Provincial legislation and policy directives. 9.2.2 The Municipality will determine if a Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report is required prior to development on or adjacent to any properties that are identified on the Municipality of Clarington Cultural Heritage Resource List, and any properties that have been identified as having potential cultural heritage value or interest. 9.2.3 A Heritage Impact Assessment shall be conducted prior to development on or adjacent to properties that are designated under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act, or properties for which a Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report has been conducted and determined that the properties meet the criteria for cultural heritage value or interest as prescribed in O. Reg. 9/06, as amended, or any successors thereto. Page 80 Courtice Transit-Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan 34 9.2.4 Cultural Heritage Evaluation Reports and Heritage Impact Assessments shall consider and provide strategies for the conservation and protection of cultural heritage resources. 9.2.5 Public art and/or other interpretive features recalling the area’s cultural heritage, including its Indigenous history, shall be integrated into the design of public open spaces. The Municipality will also encourage the integration of public art in publicly visible elements of the private realm. 10 Transportation 10.1 Objectives 10.1.1 Concentrate a mix of high-density uses close to the future GO Station with direct connections to the station that encourage residents, workers, and visitors to use transit for daily trips. 10.1.2 Line main roads with transit-supportive development and pedestrian-friendly streetscapes. 10.1.3 Ensure the road network facilitates and encourages the use of public transit by allowing for efficient transit routes and minimizing walking distances to transit stops. 10.1.4 Ensure roads and municipal services required for any part of the neighbourhood are in place and operative prior to or coincident with development. 10.1.5 Ensure engineering and other design standards for the public realm and utilities are applied consistently across CTOC. 10.1.6 Develop an interconnected grid of streets throughout the area wherever possible, directly connected to the larger road network. 10.1.7 Establish an interconnected network of active transportation infrastructure across CTOC linked to networks and trails in surrounding areas. 10.1.8 Minimize surface parking and its impact on the public realm. 10.1.9 Reduce the demand for parking over time. 10.2 General Policies 10.2.1 The road network shown in Schedule C identifies the road classifications, key active transportation connections and a zone for transit facilities related to the future Courtice GO Station. The alignments of roads and active transportation connections In Schedule C are approximate. Minor modifications to alignments based on Municipal Class Environmental Assessments and detailed planning and engineering studies shall not require an amendment to this Plan. 10.2.2 Table 1 identifies the classification and intended right-of-way of each road identified in Schedule C. Page 81 Courtice Transit-Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan 35 Road Classification Jurisdiction ROW Width (m) Courtice Rd Type A Arterial Durham Region 45 Street H (west of Courtice Rd) Type B Arterial MoC 36 Trulls Rd (north of Street H) Type B Arterial MoC 36 Street H (east of Courtice Rd) Type C Arterial MoC 30 Trulls Rd (south of Street H) Type C Arterial MoC 30 Baseline Rd Type C Arterial MoC 30 Street E (south of Street A) Special Collector MoC 26 Street B Collector MoC 26 Farmington Dr (south of Street B) Collector MoC 26 Farmington Dr (north of Street B) Collector MoC 23 Street C (east of Trulls Rd) Collector MoC 26 Street C (west of Trulls Rd) Collector MoC 23 Granville Dr Collector MoC 23 Street D Collector MoC 23 Street A Key Local MoC 23 Street E (north of Street A) Key Local MoC 20 Street F Key Local MoC 20 Street G Key Local MoC 20 Table 1: CTOC Road Classifications 10.2.3 In addition to the roads identified in Schedule C, development will be structured by an interconnected and grid-like network of Local Roads that facilitate direct pedestrian, cyclist, transit and vehicular movement throughout the community. Context Plans submitted with applications shall demonstrate how development will be connected to existing or planned development on surrounding lands. 10.2.4 CTOC’s network of streets shall be supplemented by landscaped mid -block active transportation connections that break up long blocks to further enhance the pedestrian permeability of the area, the efficiency and variety of pedestrian routes, and access to transit. Mid-block pedestrian connections should have a Page 82 Courtice Transit-Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan 36 minimum width that accommodates a multi-use path with landscaping on both sides to provide a buffer to any adjacent private spaces. 10.2.5 Complete, interconnected pathway networks shall be identified in Context Plans and plans of subdivision, demonstrating how the network will connect with pathway networks on adjacent lands. 10.2.6 The design of roads shall be based on a complete streets approach, in accordance with the transportation master plans, standards and guidelines of the Municipality of Clarington and Regional Municipality of Durham , with further guidance provided in the CTOC Urban Design and Sustainability Guidelines (Appendix A to this Secondary Plan) 10.2.7 The incorporation of low-impact development measures in the design of all streets shall be encouraged. 10.2.8 On-street parking generally shall be accommodated on Collector Roads and Local Roads to provide for anticipated parking needs and to assist in calming traffic movement and thereby enhancing pedestrian safety. 10.2.9 Landscaped, pedestrian-friendly roundabouts may be considered for the Prominent Intersections of Baseline Road and Trulls Road, and Baseline Road and Courtice Road. Roundabouts may be considered elsewhere where two Arterial Roads, two Collector Roads or an Arterial Road and a Collector Road intersect. Roundabouts are generally discouraged along loc al roads, but small ones may be considered for the purposes of traffic calming. 10.2.10 The conveyance of land consistent with the widening of the rights -of-way identified in this Plan shall be required to permit the development of lands adjacent to existing roads. Additional dedication for road widenings may be required, such as for grading, drainage and stormwater management, auxiliary turn lanes, transit facilities and utilities. 10.3 Arterial Roads 10.3.1 Arterial Roads will generally be designed in accordance with the standards set out in Appendix C, Table C-2 of the Clarington Official Plan, with further guidance provided in the CTOC Urban Design and Sustainability Guidelines . Arterial Roads shall include the following elements: a) Separated bike lanes or raised cycle tracks and sidewalks generally shall be accommodated on both sides for the convenience, comfort and safety of pedestrians, cyclists and other active transportation modes. Alternatively, multi-use paths may be considered where sidewalks are not required to support retail and other active ground-floor uses where Arterial Roads travel through mixed-use areas. b) Landscaped boulevards and building setbacks shall provide a buffer between moving traffic and residential and non-residential land uses on either side of the street. Page 83 Courtice Transit-Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan 37 c) Planting zones shall have sufficient width to accommodate appropriate low - impact development measures. d) Signalized intersections shall be spaced to provide convenient crossing points for pedestrians and cyclists and help distribute vehicular traffic evenly across CTOC. e) Turn lanes may be required at intersections. Double turn lanes and channelized right turn lanes shall be avoided. f) Driveway access from Arterial Roads shall be restricted except where no reasonable alternative is available. 10.3.2 As the rail corridor is upgraded to support the GO Rail Expansion, Trulls Road may be upgraded at the rail corridor. A detailed engineering analysis will be undertaken as part of the Clarington Transportation Master Plan for the Special Study Area identified on Schedules A and C to evaluate the feasibility of a future grade-separated crossing of the rail corridor and its potential impacts on adjacent lands and affected intersections. Development on lands adjacent to the rail crossing, and on other lands that may be affected by a future upgrade, may be required to dedicate land and/or incorporate appropriate setbacks to accommodate the upgrades. 10.4 Collector Roads 10.4.1 Collector Roads shall be designed in accordance with the road classification criteria in Appendix C, Table C-2 of the Clarington Official Plan. Collector Roads shall include the following elements: a) A minimum of two through lanes shall be provided, and turn lanes may be required at intersections; b) Sidewalks shall be provided on both sides; c) Cycling shall be accommodated in separated bike lanes within the roadway, in raised lanes (cycle tracks) adjacent to the roadway or on a multi -use path on one or both sides of the road; and d) Planting and furnishing zones shall be provided on both sides of the roadway and have sufficient width to accommodate appropriate low-impact development measures. 10.4.2 Notwithstanding policy 10.4.1, Street E shall have a 26-metre right-of-way to accommodate a continuous, generous tree-lined multi-use path on one side. 10.5 Local Roads and Mews 10.5.1 Development will be accessed and serviced by Local Roads generally with right- of-way widths between 18 and 20 metres, except Street A identified in Schedule C, which will require a minimum width of 23 metres. New Local Roads shall be designed in accordance with the road classification criteria in Appendix C, Table C-2 of the Clarington Official Plan. They shall include the following: Page 84 Courtice Transit-Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan 38 a) Local Roads shall feature sidewalks on both sides and generally shall also have street trees on both sides to enhance the tree canopy and establish a strong green character for CTOC; b) On-street parking shall generally be accommodated on one side of the right-of-way; c) A planting and furnishing zone shall be provided on both sides of Local Roads of sufficient width to accommodate appropriate low-impact development measures; and d) Separated bike lanes or raised cycle tracks shall be accommodated on Street A to support a continuous east west active transportation route across CTOC. 10.5.2 Local Roads generally shall not be permitted to intersect with Arterial Roads, unless the Municipality and Region are satisfied such intersections will not cause an undue safety risk to drivers, pedestrians and cyclists and will not unduly compromise arterial road operations. 10.5.3 Private streets are vehicular connections between public streets that are deemed necessary to enhance vehicular and pedestrian permeability. Private streets may be permitted through the development application process provided: a) They have features common to public streets; and; b) Meet functional requirements to the satisfaction of the Municipality. 10.5.4 Mews are streets designed primarily for pedestrians and cyclists and may be dedicated full-time or part-time to active transportation but generally also accommodate vehicles. Proposals for public and private mews will be subject to the approval of the Municipality on a case-by-case basis and shall demonstrate that they will support the placemaking objectives of this Plan and will not have a significant adverse impact on the functioning of the larger road network in the area. Mews may or may not include curbs but in all cases shall clearly demarcate zones for pedestrians. 10.6 Rear Lanes 10.6.1 Public or private Rear Lanes are strongly encouraged to support safe and attractive streets by providing access to driveways, garages, loading and servicing areas, and other back-of-house uses away from the street-facing frontage. Access to commercial loading areas shall generally be provided from Rear Lanes. 10.6.2 Rear Lanes may be required where development fronts onto an Arterial or Collector Road and for townhouse developments. 10.6.3 Public utilities may be located within public Rear Lanes subject to functional and design standards established by the Municipality. 10.6.4 Rear Lanes shall be designed in accordance with the road classification criteria in Appendix C, Table C-2. They shall meet the following criteria: Page 85 Courtice Transit-Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan 39 a) Rear Lanes shall allow two-way vehicular travel and incorporate a setback on either side of the right-of-way to the adjacent garage wall or private fence; b) Rear Lanes shall provide access for service and maintenance vehicles for required uses as deemed necessary by the Municipality and may include enhanced laneway widths and turning radii to accommodate municipal vehicles, including access for snowplows, garbage trucks and emergency vehicles where required; c) Rear Lanes shall be clear of overhead obstruction and shall be free from overhanging balconies, trees and other encroachments ; d) Rear Lanes shall intersect with public roads; e) No municipal services, except for local storm sewers, shall be allowed, unless otherwise accepted by the Manager of Development Engineering ; f) No Regional Municipality of Durham infrastructure shall be permitted ; g) Rear Lanes shall be graded to channelize snow-melt and runoff; h) The design of Rear Lanes may incorporate appropriate elements of low - impact design, such as permeable paving, where sufficient drainage exists; and i) Appropriate lighting shall be provided to contribute to the safe function of the roadway for all users, including pedestrians, cyclists, drivers and service/emergency vehicles. 10.7 Active Transportation 10.7.1 Key active transportation connections shall be implemented in general accordance with Schedule C and will include dedicated cycling lanes or raised cycle tracks, sidewalks, and multi-use paths in public rights-of-way. These will be complemented by multi-use paths within parks and other public open spaces. 10.7.2 Where a multi-use path is located within the right-of-way of a Collector Road, as will be the case with Street E, private driveways crossing the path shall be minimized and generally shall not be permitted for accessing individual dwelling units to avoid conflicts between vehicles and path users. Short blocks that result in frequent Local Roads crossing multi-use paths shall be discouraged for the same reason. 10.7.3 The Municipality will work with the Conservation Authority to develop trail networks within and adjacent to the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek valleys, as conceptually illustrated in Schedule C. The trail networks shall be accessible from parks and public roads. They shall include Primary and Secondary Trails as defined in Section 18.4 of the Clarington Official Plan. 10.7.4 Trails shall cross Courtice Road only where there are controlled intersections. Where trails intersect with Street H away from controlled intersections, crossings Page 86 Courtice Transit-Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan 40 shall be accommodated in underpasses where feasible and appropriate based on grades and environmental features or with signalized crossings at street -level. 10.7.5 The location, alignment and design of trails shall be subject to the following: a) Trail design and type will be based on each site’s sensitivity to minimize environmental impacts and will be designed to accommodate a range of users and abilities. b) Trails will be directed outside of sensitive natural areas where possible or to the outer edge of vegetation protection zones. c) Trails located adjacent to natural features and stormwater management facilities should incorporate interpretive signage at various locations to promote understanding and stewardship of the features and functions of the natural environment. d) Trails should be integrated with the maintenance access route, where feasible, to minimize the impermeable surface area and natural heritage system disturbances. 10.7.6 Proposed trails in or adjacent to Environmental Protection Areas shall be subject to Environmental Impact Studies. 10.8 Transit Facilities 10.8.1 The Municipality will ensure that transit facilities are integrated early and appropriately throughout CTOC by including Durham Region Transit in all development pre-application meetings and ensuring that transit requirements are addressed through municipal capital works and private development applications. 10.8.2 The design of transit stops shall incorporate appropriate amenities, with the following to be considered: transit shelters, seating, tactile paving, bike racks, curb cuts and appropriate lighting. Generally, transit stops at major intersections shall include shelters and seating. 10.8.3 The Transit Facilities Zone identified in Schedule A is the preferred location for transit facilities related to the GO Station, including commuter parking, passenger pick-up and drop-off areas, bus terminals and the GO Station building itself. Such facilities may be standalone but shall be sited and designed to optimize the station area for concurrent or future mixed -use development and to accommodate direct pedestrian connections from the station to the public street network and future development. The policies in Section 12.2 of this Plan shall also apply. 11 Servicing 11.1 Objectives 11.1.1 Design buildings, infrastructure and the community to high standards for energy and water conservation. Page 87 Courtice Transit-Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan 41 11.1.2 Design buildings, infrastructure and open spaces to mitigate the impacts of severe storms, flooding, and the broader impacts of climate change. 11.1.3 Ensure servicing infrastructure is located and designed to serve the planned population efficiently while providing capacity for intensification over time. 11.1.4 Ensure roads and municipal services required for any part of the neighbourhood are in place and operative prior to or coincident with development. 11.1.5 Ensure engineering and other design standards for the public realm and utilities are applied consistently across CTOC. 11.1.6 Ensure the Municipality’s capital budget anticipates infrastructure and community facilities required within CTOC in the long term. 11.2 General Policies 11.2.1 All new development within the Secondary Plan area will be serviced by municipal water and sewer services and stormwater management facilities. Existing development within the Secondary Plan area shall, over time, also be connected to these same services, where appropriate. 11.2.2 New development will proceed based on the sequential extension of full municipal services in accordance with the municipal capital works program. 11.2.3 Development applications are required to demonstrate there is adequate servicing supply and capacity available to support the proposed level of density in the context of existing and proposed development across the Secondary Plan area. 11.2.4 Any Regional infrastructure required to support the development of the Secondary Plan area is subject to the annual budget and business planning process. 11.2.5 The Municipality will work with the landowners and the Regional Municipality of Durham to develop a plan for the phasing of extensions to existing services. A phasing plan will be prepared as part of a functional servicing report by development proponents at the time an application for draft plan of subdivision is submitted. 11.2.6 Approval of development applications shall be conditional upon commitments from the appropriate authorities and the proponents of development to the timing and funding of required stormwater management, sanitary sewer and water supply facilities. These works shall be provided for in subdivision and site plan agreements. Phasing of development, based on the completion of external sewer and water services, may be implemented if required by the Municipality of Clarington. 11.2.7 Development proponents and the Municipality will seek to incorporate infrastructure and utilities in a manner that is sensitive to the quality of the public realm and design of the street network, and which reduces the impact of development on hydrologic and ecological systems. Page 88 Courtice Transit-Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan 42 11.2.8 A Master Drainage Plan for CTOC Secondary Plan area shall be completed to the Municipality’s satisfaction prior to final draft plan approval for new land uses. The Master Drainage Plan shall address the recommendations of the Robinson and Tooley Creek Flood Mitigation Study (Flood Mitigation Study). Regulatory Storm control may be required and must be designed to the satisfaction of the Conservation Authority and the Municipality of Clarington . 11.3 Stormwater Management 11.3.1 Schedule A identifies general locations for stormwater management facilities in CTOC. These locations shall be confirmed by a Master Drainage Plan and Stormwater Management Reports submitted with development applications. Areas for stormwater management facilities shall be identified in plans of subdivision. Alternative locations for stormwater management facilities may be approved by the Municipality without amendment to this Plan. 11.3.2 Stormwater management facilities generally shall be located away from arterial roads, wherever possible, to optimize arterial corridors for development. 11.3.3 Stormwater management facilities, such as ponds and low-impact development features, shall be used to mitigate the impacts of development on water quality and quantity, consistent with the Subwatershed Study and the policies of Section 20 of the Clarington Official Plan. 11.3.4 Stormwater management facilities, with the exception of outfalls, shall not be located within Environmental Protection Areas. 11.3.5 Low impact development features shall not be located within natural heritage features but may be permitted within the outer 5 metres of the vegetation protection zone provided the intent of the vegetation protection zone is maintained and it is supported by an Environmental Impact Study. 11.3.6 The precise siting of stormwater management facilities shall make use of natural drainage patterns to minimize the risk of flooding. Stormwater management facilities will not drain lands located in another subwatershed. 11.3.7 Any crossings of valley features, flood plains and water courses shall be required to consider wide open bottom culverts that have the width and height to facilitate floodplain conveyance as well as wildlife crossings for mammals off roads to avoid vehicle and wildlife fatalities. 11.3.8 Future stormwater system updates shall consider the 2051 urban expansion area in upcoming secondary plans and include analysis for Regional release rate targets to verify the flood mitigation strategy and any additional work need to understand the impacts of additional lands upon downstream flooding and stormwater management requirements. 11.3.9 Proposed stormwater management quality, quantity, erosion control and water balance for ground water and natural systems may be assessed during the development approval process to determine the impact on the natural heritage system and environmental features. Page 89 Courtice Transit-Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan 43 11.3.10 The submission of the following plans and reports, prepared in accordance with the Subwatershed Study, Flood Mitigation Study and Master Drainage Plan, shall be required to determine the impact of stormwater quality/quantity, erosion and water balance of the proposed development: a) Stormwater Management Report and Plan; b) Erosion and Sediment Control Plan; c) Servicing Plans; d) Grading Plans; e) Geotechnical reports; f) Hydrogeologic reports; and g) Other technical reports as deemed necessary. 11.3.11 The Stormwater Management Report and Plan identified in policy 11.3.10 shall explore and consider the feasibility of and opportunities to implement such low-impact development measures as: a) Permeable hardscaping; b) Bioretention areas; c) Exfiltration systems; d) Bioswales and infiltration trenches; e) Third pipe systems; f) Vegetation filter strips; g) Green roofs (multi-unit buildings); h) Rainwater harvesting; and i) Other potential measures. 11.3.12 The Stormwater Management Report and Plan identified in policy 11.3.10 shall demonstrate how the water balance target set in the Subwatershed Study is achieved. If the water balance target is not achieved, a justification shall be submitted for review and acceptance by the Municipality of Clarington. 11.3.13 Stormwater management for all development shall be undertaken on a volume control basis and shall demonstrate the maintenance of recharge rates, flow paths and water quality to the greatest extent possible. Peak flow control, off peak storage, water reclamation and/or reuse and the maintenance of pre- development water balance shall be demonstrated. 11.3.14 High Volume Recharge Areas shall maintain a pre-development water balance. 11.3.15 Stormwater management facilities shall incorporate naturalized landscaping and accommodate trails and seating areas where appropriate. Page 90 Courtice Transit-Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan 44 11.3.16 Development of all low- and medium-density dwellings shall demonstrate the use of an adequate volume of amended topsoil or equivalent system to improve surface porosity and permeability over all turf and landscaped areas beyond three metres of a building foundation a nd beyond tree protection areas. 11.3.17 Development is encouraged to promote water conservation and efficiency, including through strategies such as installing rainwater harvesting and recirculation/reuse systems, using water efficient and drought resistant plant materials where appropriate, supporting oth er agencies with programs related to water conservation and water demand management, and considering technological and other system improvements. 11.3.18 Green roofs, where applicable, shall be designed to help manage stormwater. 11.3.19 The public realm will be designed to manage the quantity and quality of stormwater run-off and mitigate the potential for downstream erosion during storm events. 11.3.20 Xeriscaping using native, drought-tolerant plants as a cost-effective landscape method to conserve water shall be encouraged. 11.3.21 The irrigation of street trees through green infrastructure or other passive means may be considered as part of the broader stormwater management system to improve the resilience of the urban tree canopy. 12 Implementation and Interpretation 12.1 Objectives 12.1.1 Ensure roads, road improvements, and municipal services required for any part of the neighbourhood are in place and operative prior to or coincident with development. 12.1.2 Support the timely delivery of public access to parkland, schools and other community amenities. 12.1.3 Ensure engineering and other design standards for the public realm and utilities are applied consistently across CTOC. 12.1.4 Ensure the Municipality’s capital budget anticipates infrastructure and community facilities required within CTOC in the long term. 12.2 Policies 12.2.1 A Zoning By-law shall be an essential tool used to implement the policies of this Secondary Plan. 12.2.2 The policies of this Secondary Plan shall be considered when making decisions related to development of the lands within the CTOC Secondary Plan Area. The policies of this Secondary Plan shall be implemented by exercising the powers conferred upon the Municipality by the Planning Act, the Municipal Act and any Page 91 Courtice Transit-Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan 45 other applicable statues, and in accordance with the applicable policies of the Clarington Official Plan. 12.2.3 Submission of a Context Plan may be required with applications for rezoning, plan of subdivision or site plan approval. 12.2.4 The purpose of a Context Plan is to demonstrate how proposed development will relate and connect to existing or planned development on surrounding lands and guide coordinated implementation of required infrastructure and community facilities. Context Plans will identify the following: a) The limits of Environmental Protection Areas based on area-specific Environmental Impact Studies; b) Planned public roads and active transportation connections, including mid - block pathways; c) Private streets, where appropriate, and other privately -owned connections where a public easement may be required; d) Existing and planned land uses; e) Planned parks; f) Delineated sites planned or reserved for schools and other community facilities; g) Areas for stormwater management facilities and low-impact development features; and h) Proposed sites and frontages for retail uses. 12.2.5 The boundaries of Context Plans will be determined by the Municipality and generally will extend to the second Arterial or Collector Road beyond the development site. Consultation with landowners within the Context Plan area may be required to ensure the plan accurately reflects intended, proposed and planned development in the area. 12.2.6 Alternative development standards for infrastructure may be developed and approved for specific areas or all of CTOC without amendment to this Plan, provided they meet the intent and support the objectives of the Plan. 12.2.7 An existing use of land, building or structure that is lawfully in existence prior to the passage of the implementing Zoning By-law, and which does not conform to this Secondary Plan but continues to be used for such purposes, shall be deemed to be legal non-conforming. Expansions and extensions of legal non- conforming uses will require an application to the Committee of Adjustment and may be permitted provided the expansion or extension continues the non- conforming use. 12.2.8 Non-conforming uses shall be encouraged to relocate or redevelop so that the subject land may be used in conformity with the policies of this Secondary Plan and the provisions of the implementing Zoning By-law. Page 92 Courtice Transit-Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan 46 12.2.9 It is the intent of the Municipality to permit some flexibility in accordance with Clarington Official Plan policy 24.1.5 in the interpretation of the policies, regulations and numerical requirements of this Secondary Plan except those regarding minimum densities and minimum and maximum heights, where this Secondary Plan is intended to be prescriptive. 12.2.10 The Urban Design and Sustainability Guidelines appended to this Secondary Plan as Appendix A provide specific guidelines for both the public and private realms. They clarify the Municipality’s expectations with respect to the form, character and qualities of development in the CTOC area. 12.2.11 The Municipality encourages utility providers such as hydroelectric power, communications/telecommunications facilities and utilities, broadband fibre optics, and natural gas to ensure that sufficient infrastructure is or will be in place to serve the Plan area. 12.2.12 All new development within the Secondary Plan area shall proceed on the basis of the sequential extension of full municipal services through the Regional and Municipal capital works programs and plans of subdivision. 12.2.13 Development applications for lands abutting existing Arterial Roads and Collector Roads may require the dedication of land for road widenings or road upgrades, as determined by the Municipality or Region. 12.2.14 Approval of development applications shall be conditional upon commitments from the appropriate authorities and the proponents of development to the timing and funding of required infrastructure and community facilities, including roads, sanitary sewers, water services, stormwater management facilities, parks, schools and other community facilities. These works shall be provided for in the subdivision and site plan agreements. Phasing of development, based on the completion of the external public works, may be required by the Municipality. 12.2.15 The Secondary Plan recognizes that comprehensive planning requires the equitable sharing amongst landowners of the costs associated with the development of land. It is a policy of this Secondary Plan that prior to the approval of any draft plan of subdivision, or registration of phase thereof, applicants/landowners shall have entered into appropriate cost sharing agreements that establish the means by which the costs of developing the property, which may include parks, roads, road improvements, external ser vices, stormwater management facilities, public/private utilities, schools, and all related community costs, are to be shared. The Municipality will require, as a condition of draft approval or site plan approval, that a clearance letter be provided to the Municipality from the trustee named in the cost sharing agreement that landowners have met their obligations under the relevant cost sharing agreements prior to registration of a plan of subdivision or site plan approval. 12.2.16 Landowners are encouraged to enter into a Master Parkland Agreement with the Municipality prior to the approval of any draft plan of subdivision or site plan. The Master Parkland Agreement shall identify the minimum size and Page 93 Courtice Transit-Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan 47 general location of parks that shall be provided and dedicated in accordance with Schedule A. 12.2.17 The Municipality will require, as a condition of draft approval or site plan approval, that proof be provided to the Municipality that landowners have satisfied all their parkland obligations with respect to the Master Parkland Agreement, if applicable, prior to registration of a plan of subdivision or site plan approval. 12.2.18 In accordance with Provincial legislation and regulations, Council may seek to implement a transit station charge to pay for costs related to the construction of the GO Transit Station. 12.2.19 Development applications shall include the following information: a) Net residential density by land use designation; b) Identification of total area of non-residential land uses; c) Number and type of units by land use designation; d) Total development application unit count; e) Estimated population; f) Amount/type of non-residential space and number of jobs; and g) Number of purpose-built additional dwelling units. 12.2.20 All policies of the Clarington Official Plan shall apply to this Secondary Plan Area. Policies that cite specific Clarington Official Plan policies have been provided for convenience only. 12.2.21 The CTOC Secondary Plan has been prepared to align with the policies of the Clarington Official Plan and Region of Durham Official Plan. The policies, maps and appendices shall be read and interpreted in conjunction with the policies of the Clarington Official Plan. 12.2.22 In the event of a conflict between the Clarington Official Plan and this Secondary Plan, the policies of the Secondary Plan shall prevail, including density and intensification policies. 12.2.23 Where examples of permitted uses are listed under any specific land use designation, they are intended to provide examples of possible uses. Other similar uses may be permitted provided they conform to the intent and all applicable provisions of this Secondary Plan. 12.2.24 The Municipality recognizes the need for a degree of flexibility and allow for well-designed buildings that respond appropriately to the conditions of their site and its surroundings and are consistent with the principles of this Plan and meet the general intent of its policies. Where “generally” is used to qualify a built form policy found in Section 6 of this Plan, it is expected the requirement will be met except where an applicant has demonstrated to the Municipality’s satisfaction that site-specific conditions warrant the consideration of alternatives, and that the proposed alternative built form parameters meet the general intent of Page 94 Courtice Transit-Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan 48 the policy. Such exceptions shall not require an amendment to this Secondary Plan. 12.2.25 The Municipality will monitor the policies of this Secondary Plan and propose updates as deemed necessary. Page 95 Schedule A - Land Use Plan Courtice Transit-Oriented Community Secondary Plan LEGEND Page 96 DRAFTSchedule B - Parks and Community Facilities Schedule B - Parks and Community Facilities Courtice Transit-Oriented Community Secondary Plan LEGEND Page 97 DRAFTSchedule C - Roads and Active Transportation Network LEGEND Schedule C - Roads and Active Transportation Network Courtice Transit-Oriented Community Secondary Plan Page 98 Courtice Transit-Oriented Community NOVEMBER 2025 URBAN DESIGN & SUSTAINABILITY GUIDELINES Appendix A Attachment 1c to Report PDS-066-25 Page 99 Page 100 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION 1 1.1. PURPOSE OF THE GUIDELINES 2 1.2. STRUCTURE OF THE GUIDELINES 2 1.3 HOW TO INTERPRET AND USE THE GUIDELINES 2 2. CTOC VISION AND COMMUNITY STRUCTURE 3 2.1. VISION 4 2.2. COMMUNITY STRUCTURE 4 3. PRIVATE REALM GUIDELINES 7 3.1. HIGH-RISE AND MID-RISE MIXED USE AND RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS 8 3.2. LOW-RISE BUILDINGS 13 3.3. OFFICE BUILDINGS 17 3.4. INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS 19 4. PUBLIC REALM GUIDELINES 21 4.1. ROAD NETWORK AND BLOCK PATTERN 22 4.2. TRANSPORTATION NETWORK 23 4.3. STREETSCAPES 4.4. TRANSIT FACILITIES ZONE 39 4.5. PARKS AND OPEN SPACES 41 4.6. SCHOOLS AND OTHER COMMUNITY FACILITIES 47 4.7. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AREAS 48 5. GREEN DESIGN GUIDELINES 49 5.1. ENERGY AND WATER CONSERVATION AND EFFICIENCY 50 5.2. LANDSCAPE AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT 51 Page 101 1 INTRODUCTION The Municipality of Clarington is committed to building well-designed urban environments that support sustainability goals, ecomomic prosperity and a high quality of life. This section sets the context for the Courtice Transit- Oriented Community Urban Design and Sustainability Guidelines. It addresses the document’s purpose and explains how it is organized and intended to be used. Page 102 2Urban Design and Sustainability Guidelines 1.1. Purpose of the Guidelines The Courtice Transit-Oriented Community (CTOC) is within Courtice’s urban boundary, south of Bloor Street, east of Robinson Creek, west of Tooley Creek and north of Highway 401. These Guidelines apply to the CTOC Secondary Plan Area, including the Protected Major Transit Station Area (PMTSA) around the future Courtice GO Station. The CTOC Urban Design and Sustainability Guidelines (CTOC Guidelines) complement and support the CTOC Secondary Plan. They provide a comprehensive set of design principles and urban design direction applicable to all forms of development to guide the CTOC Area’s transformation into a complete, mixed-use, transit- supportive community. 1.2. Structure of the Guidelines This document contains five main sections: Section 1: Introduction – provides an overview of the context for the CTOC Guidelines and addresses their purpose, how they are structured and how they are to be used. Section 2: Vision and Community Structure – describes the vision for CTOC and the key elements that will organize future development. A Demonstration Plan conceptually illustrates the vision, showing one potential outcome of applying the Secondary Plan policies and these Guidelines. Section 3: Private Realm Guidelines – contains guidelines for various building types, such as high-rise, mid-rise and low-rise, office and industrial buildings. Section 4: Public Realm – contains guidelines applicable to the street network, active transportation facilities, transit facilities, streetscapes, parks and open spaces, community facilities and environmental protection areas. Section 5: Green Design Guidelines - provides direction on how development can promote environmental sustainability, with a focus on energy and water conservation and stormwater management. 1.3 How to Interpret and Use the Guidelines The CTOC Guidelines will help to implement the Municipality of Clarington Official Plan and CTOC Secondary Plan policies and provide greater clarity on policy intentions for urban design, streetscapes, built form and environmental sustainability. The CTOC Guidelines will be used in conjunction with Official Plan policies, Secondary Plan policies, the implementing Zoning By-law and the Municipality of Clarington’s General Architectural Design Guidelines in reviewing development applications to ensure a high level of urban design and sustainability is achieved. Development proposals that differ from the CTOC Guidelines and Architecture Guidelines may still be considered if they meet the intent of the CTOC Secondary Plan and the CTOC Guidelines and Architecture Guidelines. Evaluation will be based on the merits of the development proposal. Where there is conflict between the CTOC Guidelines and the Architecture Guidelines, the CTOC Guidelines shall prevail. The CTOC Guidelines are intended to be used by the building and development industry in the preparation of development proposals. Municipal staff will refer to the Guidelines in their review of development applications, including Draft Plan of Subdivision, Zoning By-law Amendment, and Site Plan Control applications. Page 103 2 CTOC VISION AND COMMUNITY STRUCTURE Page 104 4Urban Design and Sustainability Guidelines 2.1. Vision The Courtice Transit-Oriented Community is envisioned to be a unique new green community offering all types of housing to accommodate 29,000 residents, a variety of jobs for more than 8,000 workers, and a full range of amenities. CTOC will be inclusive. A range of housing choices will be provided, including single-detached and semi-detached houses, townhouses, duplexes, triplexes, and apartment buildings. There will be a significant supply of affordable ownership and rental housing as well as supportive housing to ensure the needs of individuals and families at all stages of life can be met. CTOC will be diverse. A variety of housing and employment opportunities will help ensure the community is socially diverse. This will be matched with diversity in the built environment—housing at all scales; different styles of architecture; a mix of shops, restaurants and entertainment; and open spaces and indoor facilities for all manner of recreational interests. CTOC will be vibrant. The design of neighbourhoods, parks and streetscapes and a high-density, mixed-use core will encourage street life, social interactions and community gatherings. Institutional uses, a high-quality public realm and a diverse local economy will support ongoing vitality and attract visitors from across the region. CTOC will be connected. The future Courtice GO station, adjacent highways and existing arterial roads will connect residents and businesses to destinations and communities across the Greater Toronto Area. An interconnected network of local streets, trails, pathways and bike lanes will make it easy to get around by walking, cycling and taking local transit. CTOC will be green. The valley lands and forests that surround CTOC will provide a rich green setting for development, and neighbourhood parks scattered across the community will provide a gathering and play space for every neighbourhood. A central park and urban squares will offset the high density of development in the core and provide places for respite, picnicking and events. Environmental design features applied to buildings, open spaces, infrastructure and the community as a whole will help ensure CTOC supports Clarington’s Priority Green goals and standards for sustainability. 2.2. Community Structure The vision, principles, and objectives of the CTOC Secondary Plan are supported by a community structure comprised of the following, as illustrated in Figure 1: Natural Areas: The valley lands of Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek, tributaries that feed them and forested areas together surround the CTOC Secondary Plan Area, and establish a rich and sensitive green setting for development. As these areas are protected and enhanced, they will become an amenity for future residents and visitors, fundamental to the community’s environmental health and social well-being. Highways: Highways 401 and 418 are not technically within the CTOC Area but nevertheless play a vital role in its physical structure. They help to frame the area, and their presence will influence land uses and the road network. Employment uses in particular will benefit from the visibility and access the highways afford. Future Courtice GO Station: The growth and prosperity of CTOC will depend on a multi-modal transportation network centred on the future Courtice GO Station. The station and surrounding lands provide a focus for high-density housing, office development and commercial amenities that, together with a pedestrian-friendly public realm, contribute to creating a unique mixed-use district. Transit Corridor: Courtice Road is a Regional Corridor that will be the primary transportation route to and through CTOC for transit, commercial and personal vehicles. As such, it will be a focus for transit-oriented development and streetscaping that supports active transportation and reinforces Clarington’s identity as an attractive, sustainable community. Green Active Transportation Spine: Between Trulls Road and Courtice Road, a continuous north-south landscaped multi-use path will function as a green active transportation corridor that connects neighbourhoods, parkland and forest in the north half of the PMTSA to the future GO Station and other destinations in the south half. In the long term, the green spine may be extended to the Courtice waterfront via a pedestrian/bicycle bridge over Highway 401. Page 105 5 Courtice Transit Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan Parks and Open Space Network: Future residential and mixed-use neighbourhoods will be centred on Neighbourhood Parks, including four significant parks, to ensure most residents are within short walking distance of public green space. In addition, a central “Special Park” will serve all of CTOC and, as a multi-purpose space for events, is expected to be a civic destination for all Courtice residents. Multi-use paths and mid-block connections throughout the community will further contribute to a green framework for development. High-Density Mixed-Use Core: The core of CTOC, centred on the future GO station, will be the area for the highest densities of development, the tallest buildings and the greatest range of uses. This will be the place to find a variety of options for housing, working, shopping, dining and entertainment. At the edges of the core, development will be less intense to provide a transition to lower scale neighbourhoods. Urban Residential Areas: North and west of the core, CTOC will comprise mostly low-rise neighbourhoods at varying densities and with a variety of housing types as well as neighbourhood-oriented commercial amenities. Within the PMTSA, medium-density forms of housing will be dominant, while west of Trulls Road there will be a full range of residential types, from detached homes to mid-rise apartment buildings. Interconnected local street networks will connect neighbourhoods to one another and to the attractions in the core. Employment Areas: South of the rail corridor, areas against Highway 401 will be maintained mostly for industrial uses that benefit from convenient highway access and broaden employment opportunities for Courtice residents. Complementing the Clarington Energy Park, these areas will provide a stable environment for the growth of established and new businesses that diversify Clarington’s economy. Page 106 6Urban Design and Sustainability Guidelines This page intentionally left blank Page 107 3 PRIVATE REALM GUIDELINES The private realm encompasses properties that will remain in private ownership and includes both buildings and the sites they occupy. This represents the majority of development areas within the Courtice Transit-Oriented Community. A wide variety of new development is planned, ranging from low-rise to high-rise and containing residential, office, retail, institutional and industrial uses. The design and quality of development will contribute significantly to creating a livable and healthy new community. Page 108 8Urban Design and Sustainability Guidelines 3.1. High-Rise and Mid-Rise Mixed Use and Residential Buildings High-rise and mid-rise buildings are primarily permitted in the Mixed Use Core and Mixed Use Transition Area, where a high population density will support GO service and local businesses. Mid-rise buildings up to six storey are also permitted along arterial roads within the Medium Density Residential Area. High-rise buildings are generally those above 10 storeys, while mid-rise buildings are generally 5-10 storeys. Both building typologies may contain a mix of uses or solely residential uses, depending on their location. In the Mixed Use Core and Mixed Use Transition Area, high-rise and mid- rise buildings will support the development of a community with the widest mix of uses including residential, office, hospitality, retail, commercial and institutional uses. These building types will form the foundation of this new urban area, and should be carefully designed with a high quality of architecture and to fit with their context, frame the public realm, prioritize pedestrian movement, and be well-integrated with adjacent uses and buildings. 3.1.1. GENERAL SITE AND BUILDING DESIGN A. Buildings should be oriented towards streets and open spaces to frame the public realm and support pedestrian-friendly environments. B. Buildings should be designed to fit within the emerging and planned context and mitigate potential impacts of height, massing, and shadow on their surroundings, including nearby lower scale areas, cultural heritage resources, planned open spaces, and existing natural areas. C. Main building walls should establish a consistent streetwall to create a sense of enclosure and frame the public realm. D. In the Mixed Use Core and Mixed Use Transition Area, mixed-use buildings should have a consistent setback along the street between 2 and 5 metres to provide space for a wide walking zone, restaurant patios and retail displays, where appropriate. E. Where residential or office buildings without ground- floor retail or street-related units line a street, the setbacks generally should be 1-3 metres, except where forecourts are appropriate. F. Where a residential building contains ground-floor units with entrances on the street, a setback of 3-5 metres should be provided for a buffer between the public and private realms and room for stairs, porches and elevated patios. G. On large sites with multiple buildings and frontages greater than 150 metres on two intersecting streets, through-block pedestrian connections should be provided to complement and link the existing network of public streets and pathways. H. Sites should be designed to integrate natural constraints and features on the site, where applicable. I. Buildings should be located and oriented to maximize energy efficiency, natural ventilation and sunlight penetration and minimize shadow and wind impacts on the public realm and surrounding properties. J. Building design should include environmental controls such as canopies, awnings, and louvers to regulate sun and wind exposure. K. Building design should, where possible, incorporate sustainable building features, such as water collection and storage, photovoltaic applications, green roof design, high albedo surfaces and extended eaves for sunshade. Buildings should be articulated with high- quality, sustainable materials and finishes to promote design excellence, innovation and building longevity. L. Architectural variation, texture, and materiality should be incorporated into the design of buildings to establish community identity and enhance visual interest. M. Building façades should incorporate bird-friendly design elements, such as sunshades or louvers, visual markers within large glazed areas, and non-reflective glazing, to minimize the potential for bird collisions. N. On corner sites where the intersecting streets are different types, buildings should be designed to respect Mixed-use high-rise building framing the street Page 109 9 Courtice Transit Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan and respond to the planned height, scale, and built-form character of both streets. O. Loading and servicing areas should be located away from streets and major open spaces to maintain a pedestrian-friendly public realm. P. Vehicular access should be located off secondary streets, where feasible, integrated into the design of the building to mitigate their visual impact on the public realm. Q. Where high-rise or mid-rise buildings are adjacent to lower-scale buildings, transitions in the form of separation and /or stepped massing should be provided to maintain privacy and mitigate the potential for overlook and shadowing. R. Building frontages should be articulated, and where appropriate, breaks should be introduced along the streetwall to help break up the perceived mass of longer buildings and to mitigate wind impacts. S. Ground floor heights should be taller than typical residential floor heights to accommodate non- residential uses, or the potential to convert uses in the ground floor over time in areas that permit non- residential uses. Ground floor heights should be at least 4 metres for commercial uses and for programming flexiblity in residential buildings. 3.1.2. MASSING OF HIGH-RISE BUILDINGS A. High-rise apartment buildings may generally be in the range of 11 to 40 storeys, depending on their location, in accordance with CTOC Secondary Plan policies. B. High-rise buildings should be architecturally interesting and create a cohesive design composition through their proportion, scale, massing and building materials. These building forms typically feature a defined base or podium that can support and frame the public realm, helping to create an inviting and comfortable pedestrian environment; a middle section, or tower, that can mitigate the perception of bulk and impacts on the public realm; and a top section that creates an interesting skyline. C. Podiums should have heights that related to the width of the adjacent road right-of-way, generally 3-6 storeys. Above the building base, stepbacks should generally be incorporated to distinguish the tower from the building base. This perception of articulation can also be achieved in alternative ways, including the use of cantilevers, canopies and material changes. D. The building tower should be designed to ensure access to sky views and daylight, mitigate shadows and adverse microclimate conditions on the public realm and private amenity areas, and maintain privacy for occupants. Measures should include: Articulated building frontage with tall ground floor Ground floor units with flexible design to accommodate various uses over time Page 110 10Urban Design and Sustainability Guidelines i. Staggering towers on a block and across blocks wherever possible. ii. Floorplates should not exceed 850 square metres for residential buildings. Office buildings may require larger floorplates. iii. Towers facing one another, partially or entirely, including projections, should be separated by a minimum of 30 metres. Staggered towers should be a minimum of 25 metres apart (see diagrams below). 3.1.3. MASSING OF MID-RISE BUILDINGS A. Mid-rise buildings generally are those from 5 to 10 storeys, but they may have a height up to 12 storeys, if they front Courtice Road. B. Mid-rise buildings should be designed as compact, street-related building forms with a strong streetwall and energy efficient massing. C. Mid-rise buildings longer than 40 metres should break up their mass with offset facades, vertical recesses and/or changes in material or colour. Generally, mid-rise buildings should not exceed 70 metres in length. 3.1.4. FACADES AND ENTRANCES A. On commercial streets, the base building should include continuous active commercial, institutional or other active uses, with the exception of areas required for lobbies. B. On secondary street frontages where a commercial character is planned but not yet established, first-floor height and flexibility in the base building structure should be provided to accommodate the transition to active commercial uses over time. C. Additional setbacks from the property line should be incorporated in strategic locations to accommodate urban squares, seasonal retail and patio space, extensions of the streetscape, public art, and entrances to above-grade uses. Mid-rise buildings with articulated and varied facades Commercial entrances set back from the pedestrian clearway, with bicycle parking, street furniture and weather protection Page 111 11 Courtice Transit Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan D. Building façades visible from the public realm should be well-articulated and incorporate a rhythm of transparent glass and solid materials, while avoiding blank walls. E. Principal entrances to commercial units should be designed to be oriented towards and highly visible from the public realm and located at the same level as the sidewalk. F. For uses above the ground floor, principal entrance(s) should be designed in highly visible locations with direct access from the public realm. G. Architectural treatments, accent illumination and landscaping may also be incorporated to accentuate building entrances. H. Ground level residential units directly accessed from the public realm should establish a transition between public and private space through a combination of setbacks, low fencing, stairs, hedges, planters and/or elevated patios. I. Weather protection elements, such as awnings, canopies, and projecting façade elements, should be incorporated to provide coverage at main entrances, and maintain clear sightlines to ground floor uses and entrances. Where provided, these elements should provide a generous vertical clearance above grade. J. Balconies and other projections should be architecturally integrated into the structure and detailing of the building. Protruding balconies should not dominate all facades of a tower. Partially or wholly recessed balconies are strongly encouraged. 3.1.4. ROOFTOP ELEMENTS, MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT AND UTILITIES A. The architectural treatment of the rooftop should be designed to complement the overall building design and integrate penthouses, stair towers, elevator towers and mechanical equipment. B. Roof-top mechanical or telecommunications equipment, signage, and amenity space, where appropriate, should be integrated into the design and massing of the upper floors of the building and should be screened with durable materials integrated with the design of the building. C. Mechanical systems and utilities, such as drainage pipes, vents and meters, should be architecturally integrated into the façade and building design and screened from view from the public realm. 3.1.5. PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION, LANDSCAPING AND AMENITY A. Landscape design should incorporate trees and a mix of soft and hard landscaping. Existing mature trees should be retained, where possible B. Clear, direct and accessible walkways should be provided from the sidewalk to the main entrance of buildings. C. Mid-block pedestrian connections should be provided in blocks over 200 metres long to improve pedestrian permeability and connectivity. D. Green roofs should be integrated into mid-rise and high- rise building rooftops. E. Shared private outdoor amenity space should be provided within building sites for residential and some non-residential uses, located at grade and/or on building rooftops. F. Amenity spaces should be designed to maximize access to sunlight, minimize noise and air quality impacts from site servicing and mechanical equipment, and include elements that facilitate use year-round for people of all ages and abilities. The following features should be considered: high-quality, universally accessible, and environmentally sustainable materials; four-season landscaping; seating; pedestrian-scale lighting; trees and other vegetation; shade structures; weather protection; privacy screening; children’s play structures; and barbecue equipment. Wide and landscaped mid-block connection Page 112 12Urban Design and Sustainability Guidelines G. Where possible, interior amenity spaces should be located adjacent to shared outdoor amenity areas and provide windows and doors for direct physical and visual access between these spaces. H. Places for pet runs either at the rear or side of the building at-grade or on a shared rooftop space are encouraged. 3.1.6. VEHICULAR CIRCULATION, PARKING, LOADING AND SERVICING A. Vehicular entrance locations should be minimized in width and consolidated and shared where possible in order to reduce the extent of curb cuts in the streetscape, maximize opportunities for soft landscaping, and reduce potential conflicts with pedestrians along the sidewalk. B. Wherever possible, vehicular access ramps should be provided from a secondary street and separated from parks, amenity spaces or other open spaces. C. Vehicular circulation should be located and designed to minimize visual impacts on adjacent properties, pedestrian movement and the public realm. D. All required vehicle parking should be provided on-site. E. Underground parking is strongly encouraged, with driveway entrances integrated into the building design and envelope. F. Surface parking may be located at the rear of buildings and is not permitted in the front or side yard of buildings, with the exception of accessible parking spaces. G. Above-ground structured parking should be wrapped with residential units or active uses or otherwise integrated into the design of a building to separate parking areas from the public realm. 3.1.7 LOADING AND SERVICING A. Buildings should be designed to accommodate separated waste stream storage and collection. B. Waste and recycling collection areas should be located within the building structure. C. Loading and service areas should be integrated into the building envelope or placed away and screened from any street, park, amenity space or public open space. Screening measures include landscaping and/or solid panel fencing. D. Utility meters, transformers and mechanical equipment should be located in compliance with utility authority requirements and should be located away from public view and/or screened with landscaping or a decorative wall. E. Noise attenuation measures should be incorporated into the design of loading and service areas. Access to parking and servicing areas located to the side of the building and integrated into building envelope Mixed-use building with screened utilities at the side Page 113 13 Courtice Transit Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan G. A variety of lot sizes is envisioned for low-rise building types. This allows for variation in scale, massing and form to create visual interest, while also ensuring a diversity of housing types across CTOC. H. Vehicular access and loading/servicing areas for multiple-unit developments should be consolidated and located away from the street to maintain a pedestrian- friendly public realm. I. A variety of architectural expression among publicly exposed elevations is encouraged, including variation in roof lines, architectural styles, and material articulation. 3.2.2. HEIGHT AND MASSING A. Low-rise apartment buildings longer than 40 metres should break up their mass with offset facades, vertical recesses or changes in material or colour to create visual interest along the streetscape. B. Blocks of townhouses should not exceed 8 units along the street, and blocks of stacked, back-to-back townhouses should not exceed 16 units. C. Adequate separation should be provided between townhouse blocks to allow for landscaping, fencing and outdoor storage screened from view. Where no pathway is required between townhouse blocks, 3 metres of separation is generally adequate, where a private pathway to access the interior of the site is provided, the separation should be a minimum of 4 metres. 3.2. Low-Rise Buildings Low-rise buildings include a wide range of typologies up to 4 storeys in height, including apartment buildings; street townhouses; stacked townhouses (including back-to-back stacked townhouses); fourplexes, triplexes and duplexes; and semi-detached and detached houses. They contain predominantly residential uses, though they may also contain home businesses, and apartment buildings on main streets may contain compatible neighbourhood-scale commercial uses on the ground floor. In the Medium Density Residential area of the CTOC, low- rise buildings up to 4 storeys are permitted, including low- rise apartment buildings, stacked townhouses and street townhouses. For clarity, street townhouses are attached side-to-side in blocks of at least three, are typically 3 storeys tall and have rear yards; stacked townhouses are attached side-to-side and may also be attached back- to-back and generally provide balconies, patios and/or rooftop decks rather than rear yards. In the Low Density Residential area, low-rise buildings up to 3 storeys are permitted, including street townhouses, fourplexes, triplexes, duplexes, semi-detached houses and detached houses. 3.2.1. GENERAL SITE AND BUILDING DESIGN A. Low-rise buildings should be oriented to public streets and open spaces to frame the public realm and support a safe, comfortable pedestrian environment. B. Front setbacks along a street should generally align to ensure visual continuity along the streetscape. C. Building setbacks should be generous enough to enable suitable areas for soft landscaping and provide sufficient soil for mature tree growth. Front yard setbacks should be a 3-5 metres, except where parking is located at the front of a house, in which case the garage should be setback a minimum of 6 metres. D. Building projections, such as covered porches, balconies and stairs are encouraged and may project into the front yard setback. E. On long blocks greater than 200 metres, mid-block pedestrian connections should be provided to complement, connect, and extend the existing network of public streets and parks. F. Sites should be designed to integrate natural constraints and features on the site, where applicable. Low-rise apartments framing pedestrian friendly streets Page 114 14Urban Design and Sustainability Guidelines 3.2.3. FACADES AND ENTRANCES A. Exterior walls of buildings should be articulated through use of bays, gables and porches, or designed to provide visual interest through the use of material changes. B. Main building or unit entrances should be oriented towards the public realm to improve legibility and contribute to a comfortable pedestrian environment. i. For stacked townhouses, a separate and clearly articulated main front door for each unit should be provided. ii. Apartment buildings with shared lobby spaces or entrances should promote visibility and views between interior and exterior spaces. Where possible, main building entrances should be designed to be at-grade with barrier free access from the public sidewalk. iii. Where provided, upper storey residential apartment units should be accessed via a consolidated lobby. iv. Ground floor residential units facing streets or public walkways are encouraged to have individual entrances accessing the sidewalk. Front porches or porticos are encouraged, where applicable, to give prominence to grade-related main entrances. v. All apartment building entrances should be well lit. Natural lighting is encouraged through the use of sidelights, fanlights or door glazing. Wall-mounted down-cast lighting is also appropriate adjacent to building entrances. C. Architectural elements, primarily at the front elevation or public-facing elevation, should be proportionate. This includes, but is not limited to, window sizes and shapes, balconies, terraces, dormers and rooflines. D. Large areas of uninterrupted rooftops are encouraged, particularly on south facing facades, to accommodate solar photovoltaic infrastructure. E. Dwellings on a corner lot, including townhouses, should have side elevations that includes windows and details consistent with the front elevation. Front porches should wrap around the corner of the house. 3.2.4. PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION, LANDSCAPING AND AMENITY AREAS A. Landscape design should incorporate trees and a mix of soft and hard landscaping. Existing mature trees should be retained, where possible. B. Clear, direct and accessible walkways should be provided from the sidewalk to the main entrance of buildings or units. C. A range of outdoor amenity areas should be incorporated in the design of buildings and sites, as appropriate to the building type. This may include private outdoor amenity areas such as porches, rear yards, terraces and balconies or common outdoor amenity areas such as courtyards, accessible rooftops and forecourts. Design continuity along a block of townhouses Wood frame construction stacked townhouses fronting onto a park Page 115 15 Courtice Transit Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan E. Rear lanes are strongly encouraged to provide access to parking, especially for townhouse developments of more than four units, and may be required for housing that fronts a major road. F. On corner lots, driveways should be accessed from the lower-classified street. G. Other than the permitted driveway, paving in the front yard generally should be limited to walkways. H. Where front yard driveways are provided, they should have sufficient width and length to facilitate vehicle parking, without obstructing adjacent sidewalks or vehicle sightlines. I. Driveways, parking pads and walkways should be adequately illuminated with low level, pedestrian-scaled lighting. J. The use of permeable surface materials are encouraged for driveways, parking pads and surface parking areas. K. Individual unit garages may be provided for townhouses, detached and semi-detached houses. i. Garage entrances should be incorporated, either flush with or recessed behind the building face, and architecturally integrated into the main building massing. ii. Where front yard garages are provided, the garage should not dominate the width of the front façade and they should have materials, colour and other design elements consistent with the architecture of the primary dwelling unit. D. Private outdoor amenity spaces should generally be provided in the rear; however, balconies and terraces may be provided at the front. Screening elements, including landscaping and fencing, should be provided between the private outdoor amenity spaces or rear yards of neighbouring units. E. Where privacy fencing is proposed, it should be of high architectural quality and the extent of fencing should be minimized to avoid being an expansive visual barrier. 3.2.5. VEHICULAR ACCESS, PARKING, LOADING AND UTILITIES A. Vehicular entrance locations to apartments should be minimized in width and consolidated and shared where possible in order to reduce the extent of curb cuts in the streetscape, maximize opportunities for soft landscaping, and reduce potential conflicts with pedestrians along the sidewalk B. Pick-up and drop-off access should be provided at the rear of apartment buildings, or in layby zones within the on-street parking lane, where provided. C. All required vehicle parking should be provided on-site. D. Underground parking for apartment buildings is strongly encouraged. Surface parking may be located at the rear of buildings and is not permitted in the front or exterior side yard of buildings. Rear yard parking should be buffered from private amenity areas. Passive house certified low-rise apartment building with soft landscaping in setback areas Pedestrian pathway between facing blocks of townhouses Page 116 16Urban Design and Sustainability Guidelines iii. The width of a driveway generally should correspond with the width of the garage. L. Front garages are encouraged to be expressed as two- storey structures with usable space above to better integrate this structure into the overall design of the dwelling unit. M. Front double-car garages are encouraged to have two separate openings and two doors. Single doors for double car garages should be articulated vertically and horizontally to give the appearance of two doors. Windows are encouraged, to avoid a blank-wall effect. 3.2.6. LOADING AND UTILITIES A. Utilities should be concealed or buried. Where not possible, utilities should be integrated into the architectural composition of buildings or screened from public view to minimize their visual impact on the public realm. B. Utilities and servicing areas should be located so that they do not interfere with existing trees, mature tree growth or landscaping. C. Garbage and recycling storage areas should be located at the side or rear of buildings and in rear laneways where provided. Where not possible, garbage and recycling storage areas should be screened from public view. Detached houses with living space located above the garage Page 117 17 Courtice Transit Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan 3.3.3. FACADES AND ENTRANCES A. Building facades should contain a high degree of transparency and working windows to allow for views and access to natural ventilation and daylight for employees. B. Building entrances and lobbies should be visually prominent, have pedestrian access directly from a public street and include weather protection. C. Building signage should be designed to be compatible with the overall building design D. Units designed for mixed uses, including institutional, retail, and services uses are encouraged on the ground floor of office buildings. 3.3.4. PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION, LANDSCAPING AND AMENITY AREAS A. Landscape design should incorporate trees and a mix of soft and hard landscaping. Existing mature trees should be retained, where possible. B. Amenity areas, such as forecourts, courtyards and plazas should be incorporated into site design to provide gathering, outdoor seating and break areas for building employees. Amenity areas may be located at- grade or on rooftops. 3.3. Office Buildings Office buildings will be critical to CTOC’s development over time as a complete community with a significant number of jobs and a variety of employment opportunities. Office uses are permitted throughout the Mixed Use Core and the Mixed Use Transition Area, as well as within the Business District. Within the Business District, permitted building heights range from 2 to 10 storeys, while taller office buildings are permitted in the Mixed Use Core and Mixed Use Transition Area. 3.3.1. GENERAL SITE AND BUILDING DESIGN A. Within the Mixed Use Core and Mixed Use Transition Area, office space may be accommodated in the podiums of mixed-use buildings that include residential towers or in standalone office buildings that may or may not have retail and commercial service uses on the ground floor. B. Within the Business District, an urban character should be developed, through measures that include compact building forms, building placement along street edges, consistent streetwalls, and parking and servicing located at the rear of buildings, away from the public realm. C. Office buildings should be oriented towards streets and open spaces to frame the public realm and contribute to pedestrian-friendly streetscapes. D. The facades of standalone office buildings may be set back further from the property line than residential and mixed-use buildings to allow for generous soft and hard landscaping and tree planting on site edges. E. Sites should be designed to integrate natural constraints and features on the site, where applicable. F. Building design should, where possible, incorporate sustainable building features, such as water collection and storage, photovoltaic applications, green roof design, high albedo surfaces and extended eaves for sunshade. 3.3.2. HEIGHT AND MASSING A. Office buildings should use articulation or changes in materiality to break up their perceived mass and create visual interest. B. Floor to floor heights should be a minimum of 4 metres to allow for flexibility of use and tenancy over time. C. Rooftop mechanical and other equipment should be integrated into the overall building massing and design and screened from public view. Mixed use office building framing the street Page 118 18Urban Design and Sustainability Guidelines C. Pedestrian walkways should connect building entrances to parking areas, nearby transit shelters and adjacent developments. 3.3.5. VEHICULAR CIRCULATION, PARKING, LOADING AND SERVICING A. Provide separation between vehicular routes (especially truck access/loading) and pedestrian routes on-site to avoid conflict and distinguish pedestrian routes from driving surfaces. B. Structured parking, loading and waste storage areas are encouraged to be integrated into the building design, particularly within the Mixed Use Core and Mixed Use Transition Area. C. Where loading and waste storage areas are located at- grade and outside a building envelope, they should be screened, separated from vehicle and pedestrian traffic, and located in interior side yards or rear yards. D. Surface parking areas, where provided, should be located to the rear of buildings and should be designed to incorporate areas of soft landscaping, and clear, safe pedestrian routes. E. Buildings should be designed to accommodate separated waste stream storage and collection. F. Pick-up and drop-off access and short-term delivery areas should be provided at the side or rear of buildings, or in lay-by zones within the on-street parking lane, where provided. Stand-alone office building with a landscaped forecourt and clear pedestrian circulation Office building with restaurant on ground floor and amenity terraces for building users above grade Page 119 19 Courtice Transit Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan 3.4.2. FACADES AND ENTRANCES A. Establish well-defined main entrances oriented to the public road, with weather protection. B. Building facades containing office or retail components should contain a high degree of transparency and working windows to allow for views and access to natural ventilation and daylight for employees. C. Building signage should be designed to be compatible with the overall building design and character. 3.4.3. PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION, LANDSCAPING AND AMENITY AREAS A. Landscape design should incorporate trees and a mix of soft and hard landscaping. Existing mature trees should be retained, where possible. B. The edges of industrial sites should incorporate soft landscaping, attractive fencing and tree planting to act as a visual screen. Landscape buffers should be a minimum of 3 metres wide. C. Employee and visitor amenities should be located in convenient locations, close to building entrances. D. Clear, direct and accessible walkways should be provided from the public sidewalk to the main entrance of buildings. 3.4. Industrial Buildings Industrial buildings will be located within the Light Industrial and General Industrial land use designations. Light industrial uses are also permitted within the Business District. Industrial buildings generally have large footprints and may be up to 4 storeys in height. When located within the Business District, light industrial buildings will follow the guidance in Section 3.3 and should be designed to be compatible with, and sensitive to, the variety of uses permitted in that area. 3.4.1. GENERAL SITE AND BUILDING DESIGN A. In general, industrial buildings should be located to frame public streets, with parking, loading, servicing and other functions located to the side or rear, with the exception of short-term visitor parking and delivery drop-off, and accessible parking. B. Buildings should be massed and located to provide visual and physical separation from adjacent uses, allow for landscaping and screen mechanical and service areas. C. Administration, office or retail components of industrial buildings should be located along the primary street edge and should be designed to address the street and provide direct pedestrian entry from the street or customer/visitor parking areas. D. Building facades may be set back further from the property line to allow for generous soft and hard landscaping and tree planting along site edges. Generally, front yard setbacks should be a minimum of 6 metres and a maximum of 18 metres where front yard parking is provided. E. Sites should be designed to integrate natural constraints and features on the site, where applicable. F. Building design should, where possible, incorporate sustainable building features, such as water collection and storage, photovoltaic applications, green roof design, high albedo surfaces and extended eaves for sunshade. G. Industrial sites consisting of multiple buildings should consider establishing a micro-grid system using renewable and low-carbon sources of energy. Highly transparent facade with administrative space, accessible parking and bicycle parking located at main building entrance Page 120 20Urban Design and Sustainability Guidelines E. Pedestrian walkways should connect building entrances to parking areas, nearby transit shelters and adjacent developments. F. Green infrastructure should be incorporated within industrial sites, where feasible, including Low-Impact Development (LID) practices such as using native and drought resistant vegetation; minimal maintenance design; bioswales; and impervious paving materials in appropriate locations. 3.4.4. VEHICULAR ACCESS, PARKING, LOADING AND SERVICING A. Provide separation between vehicular routes (especially truck access/loading) and pedestrian routes on-site to avoid conflicts and distinguish pedestrian routes from driving surfaces. B. Surface parking areas should be designed to incorporate areas of soft landscaping, and clear, safe pedestrian routes. C. Loading and waste storage should be enclosed within the building envelope. Where this is not possible, they should be screened, separated from vehicle and pedestrian traffic, and located in interior side yards or rear yards. D. Vehicular circulation areas should be designed to manage dust and mud tracking where appropriate. E. Outdoor storage, where permitted, as well as utilities and mechanical systems, should be screened with walls or landscaping. Clearly delineated walkway through a parking areaNaturalized stormwater management feature integrated into industrial site design Page 121 4 PUBLIC REALM GUIDELINES The public realm is comprised of interconnected places and spaces that are available for use by everyone for everyday life – streets, parks, other open spaces, multi-use paths and trails, and community facilities. The public realm collectively will play a crucial role in defining the structure, identity and character of CTOC. A successful public realm consists of well- designed spaces that provide engaging places for social interaction and community life, support commercial vitality, encourage outdoor activity, and maintain the ecological well-being and hydrological function of the community. Page 122 22Urban Design and Sustainability Guidelines 4.1. Road Network and Block Pattern The layout of roads and blocks provides the framework for development and circulation patterns, for all modes of travel. The following guidelines apply to the design and layout of all existing and planned roads within the CTOC community. A. Roads should be designed to reflect complete street design principles, balancing the needs of all users. B. Roads should form an interconnected network and grid pattern across the CTOC Area. Figure 2 conceptually illustrates how local roads can contribute to a grid network; however, it is not intended to be prescriptive with respect to the layout of local roads, with the exception of Key Local Roads. C. Blocks should generally have a maximum length of 300 metres. Where block lengths exceed 200 metres, mid- block pedestrian connections should be provided. D. Variation in block sizes is encouraged where they facilitate the development of a mix of building typologies. E. Cul-de-sacs are generally discouraged as they reduce connectivity, increase walking distances and typically result in streetscapes dominated by driveways and garages. Where cul-de-sacs are unavoidable, pedestrian connectivity should be prioritized. F. Rear laneways are encouraged throughout the CTOC Area to provide for access to parking, servicing and loading off public streets. Road and Active Transportation Network Page 123 23 Courtice Transit Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan 4.2. Road Hierarchy The transportation network in CTOC will take a complete streets approach to support a vibrant, walkable, mixed- use community and facilitate the efficient movement of pedestrians, cyclists, transit and private vehicles. The road network will prioritize connectivity and supporting a comfortable public realm. The road hierarchy consists of the following street types, with typical cross-sections shown in the following pages: • Arterial Roads • Collector Roads • Local Roads • Key Active Transportation Connections • Rear Lanes In addition to Key Active Transportation Connections, the broader active transportation network consists of: • Other multi-use paths • Bike lanes • Sidewalks • Trails The guidelines in this section should be read in conjunction with Section 3: Private Realm Guidelines to understand the relationship between the transportation network and intended built form. A. Roads within the CTOC Area will all be designed to balance the needs, safety and comfort of all users, while being designed to prioritize safety for the most vulnerable users. B. The width of the right-of-way dedicated to vehicular movement should be minimized, offering ample room for cycling and pedestrian infrastructure as well as planting and furnishing areas. C. Landscaping should allow for adequate soil volumes for mature street tree growth within and on both sides of the public right-of-way. D. Boulevard landscaping should consider opportunities to incorporate low impact development features, including road-side bioswales, rain gardens or the use of permeable pavers, where appropriate. E. Permeable pavers should not be used for the public sidewalk or portions of other public space with high pedestrian traffic. F. Curb extensions or bump-outs may be provided at key intersections with higher pedestrian volumes. Local Road and streetscape alongside an urban institutional use Road and streetscape designed to prioritize pedestrian movement in mixed use urban area Page 124 24Urban Design and Sustainability Guidelines Example of grid pattern of streets and blocks Page 125 25 Courtice Transit Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan 4.2.1. ARTERIAL ROADS Arterial Roads are intended to support high-density, mixed- use developments, as well as office and employment lands in the south of the CTOC Area. Arterial Road design must ensure a balance between the efficient movement of vehicles and transit and the comfort and safety of pedestrians and cyclists. Given the role of Arterial Roads to move vehicular traffic efficiently to and through the community, driveway access from Arterial Roads shall be restricted except where unavoidable. The following guidelines generally conform to the Region of Durham’s Arterial Corridor Guidelines for Regional Corridors and provide further guidance to achieve complete streets and the intended character and public realm for the different road types. TYPE A ARTERIAL (COURTICE ROAD) Courtice Road is identified as a Type A Arterial, providing a direct north-south connection through the community, from Highway 401 and the waterfront to Southeast Courtice, Bloor Street and beyond. Courtice Road will have a right-of- way width up to 45 metres to accommodate two vehicular lanes in each direction, turning lanes where required, cycling facilities, sidewalks, street trees and other plantings. As shown in the Option 1 cross-section on the facing page, Courtice Road should have bi-directional cycle tracks (bike paths) on both sides, separated from a sidewalk by a planting strip. This will allow cyclists to travel north or south without having to cross an intersection. Alternatively, as shown in the Option 2 cross-section, one-way cycle tracks can be located adjacent to the curb to provide further separation from pedestrians. This option may be appropriate where the road travels through commercial areas, but it is less preferred. Arterial Roads Page 126 26Urban Design and Sustainability Guidelines Page 127 27 Courtice Transit Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan TYPE B ARTERIALS Street H and Trulls Road north of Street H are identified as Type B Arterials that act as major connections through the community and the wider Courtice area. Type B Arterials will feature a right-of-way width up to 36 metres, including two vehicular lanes in either direction, street trees, plantings and sidewalks on both sides. The boulevards will be wide enough to also accommodate dedicated bike paths on both sides; alternatively, multi-use paths could replace the sidewalks and bike paths. Cycle Track Cycle Track Page 128 28Urban Design and Sustainability Guidelines TYPE C ARTERIALS Baseline Road, Trulls Road south of Street H, Street H east of Courtice Road and Hancock Road will be Type C Arterials. These roads will feature a right-of-way width up to 30 metres, which will accommodate two vehicular lanes in either direction, street trees, plantings and sidewalks on both sides, and bike lanes. There will also be an opportunity to accommodate a landscaped median, which can give way to turning lanes at intersections. Raised separators should be included to enhance safety for cyclists; alternatively, raised cycle tracks at the curbs could replace on-road bike lanes, increasing the boulevard widths to approximately 6 metres. Multi-use paths on both sides can also be considered. Page 129 29 Courtice Transit Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan 4.2.2. COLLECTOR ROADS Granville Drive, Farmington Drive, and Streets B, C and D will function as Collector Roads, providing connections between Arterial Roads and Local Roads. Collector Roads will feature right-of-way widths of 23-26 metres and will have a single travel lane for traffic in each direction. Two types of Collector Roads are planned for CTOC. Neighbourhood collectors should have a right-of-way of 23 metres to accommodate a 10-metre roadway with space for on-street parking on one side. Boulevards of approximately 6.5 metres should accommodate on both sides a raised cycle track near the curb, a landscape strip for street trees and a sidewalk. Mixed-use collectors will be sections of Collector Roads where commercial uses are planned in the Mixed Use Core and Mixed Use Transition areas. The should have a right-of- way of 26 metres to accommodate parking on both sides within a 12-metre roadway. Boulevards of approximately 7 metres should be similar to those of neighbourhood collectors but with slightly wider sidewalks. On both neighbourhood and mixed-use collectors, bump- outs should be incorporated, particularly at intersections, to accommodate additional landscaping, street furniture, bio-swales and transit shelters, and to calm traffic. Page 130 30Urban Design and Sustainability Guidelines Page 131 31 Courtice Transit Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan 4.2.3. SPECIAL COLLECTOR ROAD Street E will play a special role in CTOC as a Collector Road for drivers and cyclists and a landscaped green north-south spine providing direct connections to the future Courtice GO Station and ultimately to the Courtice Waterfront. Street E should have a right-of-way of 26 metres to accommodate a roadway of 9.5-10 metres, which will provide space for parking parking on one side, and boulevards of 4.5-5 metres on the west side and 11-12 metres on the east side. The wider east boulevard will accommodate a multi-use path of 5-6 metres between two rows of trees and other landscaping. Benches and other pedestrian amenities should also be provided in the landscape zones. Driveways crossing the multi-use path should be avoided. Where Street E is adjacent to parks or other public open spaces, the path may meander and be partially located within the open space. Striping or differentiated paving should be used to delineate zones for pedestrians and cyclists. Wide multi-use path adjacent to road Page 132 32Urban Design and Sustainability Guidelines Page 133 33 Courtice Transit Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan 4.2.4. LOCAL ROADS Most development in CTOC will be directly accessed via Local Roads, which will be designed to create intimate, low-speed, pedestrian-priority streetscapes that encourage walking and allow cyclists to share the roadway with vehicles. An interconnected grid-like network of Local Roads will be designed to weave together the community with short walkable blocks. Most Local Roads will require a right-of-way of 18-20 metres to accommodate underground utilities, a single travel lane in each direction and parking on one side. Both sides will have sidewalks and preferably street trees. Local Roads in areas of medium-density and high-density housing, particularly where commercial uses are clustered may require on-street parking on both sides of the street, in which case the right-of-way should be a minimum of 20 metres. Key Local Road A, also identified as a Key Active Transportation Connection, should have a right-of-way of 22- 23 metres to accommodate dedicated cycling infrastructure. The design of this road should be guided by the cross- section for neighbourhood Collector Roads. Local road in a high-density neighbourhood Local road in a low-density neighbourhood Page 134 34Urban Design and Sustainability Guidelines Rear lane providing access to servicing at the rear of a mid-rise building Rear lane serving medium-density development 4.2.5. REAR LANES Rear Lanes support safe and attractive public streets by providing access to driveways, garages, loading and servicing and other back-of-house uses away from the street-facing frontage. Public Rear Lanes also provide alternative pedestrian routes through a community and, in areas of street townhouses and detached and semi- detached houses, may facilitate additional dwelling units, i.e., laneway housing. A. Rear Lanes should allow for two-way vehicular travel and incorporate a setback on either side of the right-of- way to the adjacent garage or parking pad. B. Rear Lanes should be prioritized where development fronts onto an Arterial or Collector Road and for townhouse developments. C. Rear Lanes should provide access for service and maintenance vehicles for required uses as deemed necessary by the Municipality. They may include enhanced laneway widths and turning radii to accommodate municipal vehicles, including access for snowplows, garbage trucks and emergency vehicles. D. Loading areas for apartment, office and mixed-use buildings should be accessed from Rear Lanes, wherever possible. E. Lanes shall be clear of overhead obstructions and shall be free from overhanging balconies and other encroachments. F. Rear Lanes should be graded to channelize snow-melt and runoff. G. The design of Rear Lanes should incorporate appropriate Low-Impact Development measures, including permeable paving where sufficient drainage exists. H. Appropriate lighting should be provided to contribute to safety in Rear Lanes for all users. Page 135 35 Courtice Transit Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan On-road cycling facility with a physical buffer CYCLING INFRASTRUCTURE J. Where shared multi-use paths are provided for cycling, a generous width of at least 3 metres should ensure safety for all modes of movement. K. Dedicated cycling facilities should be separated from vehicular traffic and pedestrian zones with planting and/ or furnishing zones, curbs or other physical buffers. L. Signage and clear design treatments should indicate routes of travel for cyclists and whether facilities are shared with other users. SIDEWALKS M. Sidewalks should provide a well-defined, clear, predictable, and unobstructed path. N. Sidewalks should be designed to serve all users including but not limited to children, elders, and those with accessibility needs. Grading and sloping should be minimized to facilitate ease of movement. 4.2.6. BROADER ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION NETWORK The CTOC Secondary Plan Area will promote the use of alternative modes of transportation through specific infrastructure designed to create a comfortable, well connected and safe environment. The active transportation network is intended to be inclusive for all users and abilities, encompassing pedestrian, cycling and trail networks. A. The active transportation network will be interconnected and complement the road network to minimize travel distances for pedestrians and cyclists. B. Sidewalks, cycling infrastructure and trails should be located to connect major destinations, neighbourhood facilities such as parks and community facilities, the GO station and transit stops. C. Infrastructure should promote improved safety and visibility of vulnerable road users. D. Pedestrian-activated signals or crosswalks should be provided at major crossings or signalized intersections. E. Planting and furnishing zones within the road right- of-way should be designed to act as a buffer between different modes of movement, while maintaining clear sight lines and visibility. F. Planting and furnishing zones within the road right-of-way should provide space for pedestrian amenities such as seating, transit shelters and active transportation facilities such as bicycle racks. G. Active transportation facilities should be designed to facilitate winter maintenance, including snow storage. H. Wayfinding methods that include signage should be implemented to direct users at key intersections, landmarks, and attractions. I. The active transportation network should connect to and through both the public and private realms, incorporating mid-block connections and privately owned but publicly accessible spaces. Page 136 36Urban Design and Sustainability Guidelines Trails with mapping and a rest area TRAIL NETWORK O. Trails should be seamlessly incorporated into the active transportation and open space network. P. Trails are generally permitted to be located within Environmental Protection Areas, subject to guidance in Section 4.7. Q. Trails should be designed to avoid, minimize or mitigate disturbance to sensitive natural areas. R. Trails should have multiple access points, clear wayfinding and demarcated entrances. S. Amenities for trails, including but not limited to parking, washrooms, furniture, waste and recycling bins, signage, interpretive facilities, and lighting, are encouraged. T. Trails should be a minimum width of 2 metres to provide barrier-free access. U. Where trails are for multiple types of users, trails should be sized appropriately and clear signage should be provided to indicate shared or dedicated uses. V. Trail materials should be sensitive to the preservation and protection of the surrounding natural heritage, while being designed to accommodate maintenance equipment, where required. W. The design and construction of trails shall comply with universal accessibility standards. Page 137 37 Courtice Transit Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan 4.3. Streetscapes Streets are more than transportation routes; they serve as places for economic activity, social interaction and community identity. Streetscape design considers the character of a street and the functions of its components within the built form and landscape setting. Guidance in this section focuses primarily on mixed- use streets with active ground-floor uses, except where otherwise noted. 4.3.1. BUILDING INTERFACE ZONE The building interface zone accommodates the transition between the public and private realms. Generally, the interface zone along a mixed-use street will be 1-3 metres wide. A. A continuous streetwall of building facades should be established and maintained to provide a sense of enclosure and a backdrop to pedestrian activities. B. Primary building facades and entrances should be oriented directly towards streets. C. Patios and outdoor retail displays should be designed and constructed to be compatible with the surrounding streetscape elements and architectural qualities of abutting buildings. These features should not obstruct pedestrian movement. D. Canopies and awnings should be incorporated into building facades to provide weather protection for pedestrians. 4.3.2. PEDESTRIAN ZONE The pedestrian zone is intended for predictable, continuous, unobstructed, and barrier-free movement. The width of the pedestrian zone depends on various factors, including the function of the street, the width of the roadway, and the volume of pedestrian traffic. A. Sidewalks should be at least 1.8 metres wide in residential areas, and at least 2.3 metres wide in mixed- use areas. B. Continuous, unobstructed, and barrier-free sidewalks should be provided on both sides of all streets. C. Special paving materials or painted asphalt/concrete should be used to highlight pedestrian zones and crossings at intersections, and to generally enhance streetscapes. D. Where warranted, curb extensions should be incorporated at intersections and mid-block locations to expand the pedestrian zone, shorten crossings, provide additional pedestrian queuing space, and accommodate transit facilities. 4.3.3. PLANTING AND FURNISHING ZONE The planting and furnishing zone helps to create an inviting, comfortable pedestrian environment and allows for soft landscaping and tree planting to mitigate the urban heat island effect, enhance biodiversity and support stormwater management. It also provides a buffer between the pedestrian zone, cycling facilities and the roadway. A. Street trees should be native and non-invasive species, well suited to harsh urban conditions and of medium to large stature. Seed-dropping plants along barrier-free paths should be avoided, and pollinator species are encouraged. B. Adequate soil volumes, good soil structure, proper drainage and, where possible, irrigation should be provided to support the long-term health of street trees. Where street trees are desirable in locations with limited surface areas, soil cell systems should be used. C. Where warranted, the installation of street trees with continuous soil trenches, advanced rooting techniques where soil volume targets cannot be achieved with traditional planting methods, and/or drainage systems is recommended. D. Street tree should be planted to avoid conflicts with utilities and located far enough away from obstructions and building faces to all for growth to maturity. E. A flexible tree planting spacing rhythm or pattern should be established to adapt to the function of the streetscape. Where possible, groupings of street tree plantings should be integrated without impeding transit facilities, pedestrian circulation and street furniture. F. Planting beds should be incorporated into street tree planting areas or designed as stand alone greening features. G. Street furniture and wayfinding elements should be used to support a comfortable environment, reinforce a sense of place and aid navigation. H. Streetlight standards that include fixtures for the both roadway and sidewalk should be selected to minimize the number of poles needed for adequate lighting. I. Where warranted, supplemental pedestrian-oriented lighting standards should be incorporated to illuminate primary walkways and wider sidewalks. Page 138 38Urban Design and Sustainability Guidelines Pedestrian clearway and coordinated street furnishings alongside an Urban Square and mixed use building J. Municipal standards will guide street lighting, emphasizing downward illumination to reduce light pollution and preserve dark night skies. K. Public bicycle parking facilities should be located within the planting and furnishing zone, close to transit stops, building entrances, and parks and open spaces. Where space permits and activity levels warrant, these facilities can be located within the building interface zone. L. The integration of public art into streetscape elements should be considered. M. Transit stops and shelters should be located in convenient and barrier-free locations, and should consider passenger pick-up and drop-off. N. Transit shelters and seating should be provided at all transit stops on Arterial Roads and at transit stops at the intersections of two Collector Roads. 4.3.4. CURB ZONE The curb zone accommodates utilities and provides for pedestrian movement between parked vehicles and the pedestrian path. The pedestrian and planting/furnishing zones may encroach into the curb zone when additional buffering is needed in high traffic areas or where an extension of the pedestrian environment is necessary. A. Utilities and their associated equipment should generally be located underground. B. Above-ground utilities, where required, should be integrated within the streetscape design or screened from view from the public realm. C. Barrier-free curb ramps with detectable warning surfaces should be provided at all intersections. Generous and distinctive pedestrian, planting and furnishing zones in a mixed use area as well as curb extensions Page 139 39 Courtice Transit Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan 4.4. Transit Facilities Zone The Transit Facilities Zone surrounds the GO Station and will act as the central location for major transit facilities and supportive uses associated with station. It will include the GO Station itself, a bus terminal, commuter parking areas, pick-up and drop-off facilities, active transportation infrastructure, and complementary open spaces. The design of elements in this zone will prioritize transit, pedestrian and cycling movement. 4.4.1. STATION AREA LAYOUT AND ORIENTATION The orientation and layout of station facilities should be reflective of GO Transit’s access priorities and establish a clear structure around which movement and access occurs. Achieving the optimal layout and orientation of facilities within the station area is crucial to support station functions and enable the Transit Facilities Zone’s full potential over time. A. A well-structured station area should be created with the station building as the main organizing element. B. The station area should be designed to provide obvious wayfinding, through the use of transparent building materials, clear sightlines and highly visible signage. C. A clearly defined pedestrian plaza should be provided at the entrance to the station building. The plaza should act as the primary receiving area for pedestrians entering the station by foot, bike, bus or car. In the event that the station straddles both sides of the rail corridor, a pedestrian plaza should be provided on each side of the tracks. D. Bus loops and passenger pick-up and drop-off areas (PPUDOs) should be located adjacent to the pedestrian plaza. E. Landscaping should be incorporated to ensure that the station area is both attractive and comfortable for users and supportive of functional considerations such as stormwater management and snow removal and storage. 4.4.2. STATION BUILDING A. The station building, designed as a visible landmark, should serve as the central focus for all transit-related activity in and around the broader station area. B. As the principal interface between the user and various connecting transit services, the station building should display the highest level of pedestrian/passenger amenity and supportive services. C. The station building should be highly transparent, with extensive use of glass to provide clear sightlines between all elements of the station area, especially passenger waiting areas associated with train, bus, and PPUDO facilities. D. The station must be designed for universal access. 4.4.3. SUPPORTING PEDESTRIAN MOVEMENT A. Sidewalks and pedestrian pathways should be designed to be safe, clearly identifiable, and dedicated routes that are comfortable for pedestrians of all ages and abilities. B. Pedestrian waiting areas should be designed and located to provide direct, easy pedestrian access to and from the station building. C. Pedestrian waiting areas should be designed to maximize the comfort of waiting passengers and provide the information and resources needed to support customers and facilitate their journeys onward. D. A clearly defined network of dedicated pedestrian pathways throughout the station area, capable of serving both walk-in users and drivers walking between their cars and the platform area, should be created. E. Outdoor pedestrian access between the platform area and street level should be provided throughout the platform area where feasible. Retaining walls and fencing should be used sparingly unless it is being used to address operational or safety concerns. Station integrating multiple modes of movement and clear signage Page 140 40Urban Design and Sustainability Guidelines Sheltered waiting and bicycle parking areas F. Pedestrian routes within the Transit Facilities Zone should be separated from vehicular traffic routes and should be organized to create continuous direct connections between the station and area destinations. G. Buffer zones should be provided between pedestrian routes and roadways/parking lots. H. Vehicular routes should be designed to slow traffic and maintain clear sight lines to ensure safe pedestrian movement. I. Pedestrian crossings should be designed to be highly visible, obstacle-free, seamlessly integrated into the pedestrian path system and designed to minimize crossing distances. J. Crossings should be located where they can act as a direct continuation of the pedestrian path network, and should be signalized where appropriate. K. Curb cuts should be installed at all street-level crossing points to ensure fully accessible crossings and to maintain a consistent grade for the length of the crossing. L. Where required, pedestrian overpasses and underpasses should be designed to: i. Create clear, generous pedestrian routes that enable users to see from one side of the connection through to the other. ii. Incorporate generous lighting or use of skylights where appropriate to enhance a sense of safety iii. Provide weather protection. Secure bicycle locker 4.4.4. ENHANCING ACCESS FOR CYCLISTS Providing priority access and enhanced amenities for cyclists within the station area is an important strategy towards redistributing the modal split and reducing the need for expensive parking. Stations should promote and enhance the cycling experience by providing secure and convenient bicycle routes and secure bicycle parking facilities with a range of supportive amenities. A. Multi-use paths should be extended into and through the station area and be sited where they will not interfere with the function and safety of passenger waiting areas or pedestrian pathways. B. Clear and visible cycling wayfinding signage should be provided along adjacent arterials to direct cyclists towards the appropriate points of access. C. Where the use of stairs is unavoidable along bicycle access routes, a bicycle ramp should be provided and alternative stair-free routes should be marked. D. Dedicated, sheltered bicycle parking should be provided within the pedestrian plaza, the station building or a separate bike parking structure. E. Bicycle parking should be located in areas where conflicts between pedestrians and cyclists will be minimized. F. Supportive amenities such as air pumps, drinking fountains, and repair stands next to bicycle parking areas are encouraged. Page 141 41 Courtice Transit Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan 4.4.5. SUPPORTING LOCAL TRANSIT A. Station area planning should accommodate a bus terminal close to the GO station and allow for its expansion over time. B. A generous and clearly marked pedestrian route should be provided between the bus terminal and the GO station that avoids crossing vehicular routes. C. Canopies and other forms of weather protection should be provided for waiting passengers, as well as an appropriately sized, enclosed heated area for all- season use. 4.4.6. ACCOMMODATING TAXIS AND RIDE SHARING A. Access to taxi service within the GO station should be provided to integrate transportation networks, allowing passengers without vehicles direct access to destinations beyond walking distance from the station or beyond the reach of local transit service. B. Taxi stands should be located adjacent to the station plaza to enhance pedestrian accessibility and visibility. C. The taxi drop-off and pick-up location should ideally be abutting the pedestrian plaza or a raised sidewalk to ensure passenger safety when disembarking the vehicle. D. The taxi area should be designed for one-way traffic flow, with adequate room for stacking. 4.4.7. COMMUTER PARKING A. Surface parking may be provided within the Transit Facilities Zone as an interim use and should be designed to be replaced over time by structured parking or other uses. B. Where surface parking is provided, it should be designed to establish clear pedestrian pathways to and from the station building and pedestrian plaza. C. Surface parking areas should be designed to include clear and dedicated pedestrian routes as well as landscaped areas throughout that can accommodate mature tree growth. D. Where surface parking areas are oriented perpendicular to the rail corridor, lots should be located on either side of the primary access drive, lined with sidewalks and pedestrian amenities. Where surface parking areas are oriented parallel to the rail corridor, a clear pedestrian path should also be created running along the “bottom” of the lot between the rail corridor and the parking areas. 4.5. Parks and Open Spaces The parks and open space system is a fundamental organizing element for the CTOC Area and serves a critical role in providing recreational amenities, green spaces, play areas and connectivity throughout the community. Parks and open spaces will contribute to the area’s identity and will be strategically located to ensure convenient access for all residents and employees within the CTOC Area. A hierarchy of parks and open spaces throughout CTOC will support a balanced distribution of facilities and activities across the area. 4.5.1. GENERAL GUIDELINES A. The CTOC Secondary Plan identifies the location and general size and configuration of four Neighbourhood Parks and a central “Special Park”. The precise location, size and configuration of other Neighbourhood Parks and Parkettes will be determined through plans of subdivision. B. Park sizes will be as follows: i. Special Park: Minimum 2.5 ha ii. West Neighbourhood Park: Minimum 2.5 ha iii. North Neighbourhood Park: Minimum 2.0 ha iv. East Neighbourhood Park: Minimum 1.5 ha v. Central Neighbourhood Park: Minimum 1.5 ha vi. Other Neighbourhood Parks: Minimum 1.0 ha vii. Parkettes: 0.5 to 1.0 ha viii. Urban Squares: less than 0.5 ha C. Parks should be located and oriented to be: i. Uninterrupted by major physical barriers, such as rail lines, roads, and other physical barriers that restrict access; ii. Accessible by transit, bicycle and walking; iii. Highly visible with prominent public street frontages; iv. Connected to other parks, open spaces, and natural features through the active transportation network. D. Parks should be designed to maintain existing natural features, topography and trees. E. Where buildings or structures that support the function of parks and open spaces are proposed within parks and open spaces, they should be sited and designed to: i. Incorporate public amenities, including year-round public washrooms and public art, to enhance the user experience; ii. Enhance open space linkages, public access, visibility and effective use of the park or open space. Page 142 42Urban Design and Sustainability Guidelines K. Public art should be integrated into the design of park facilities or landscape features, including pieces/elements that interpret the area’s history and geography. L. Utility infrastructure should be located away from park and open space frontages. M. Alternative methods of screening or integrating utility services may be considered, including covers, wraps or public art features, in compliance with utility authority requirements. N. Where development is proposed adjacent to parks and open spaces, it should: i. Be sited and designed to minimize shadows on the park or open space. ii. Be oriented to maximize public access and views to such spaces. iii. Present a primary façade to the park or open space. iv. Buffer private amenity space with low fencing, hedges, pathways and, where appropriate, grade changes. Parks and Community Facilities Plan F. Parks should include furnishings such as benches, seating, tables and secure bicycle parking. These elements should be coordinated in their design and built of durable, low-maintenance materials. G. Where possible, locate furnishings in or near natural shade or integrate shade structures to support comfort and year-round usability. Select materials and finishes that minimize heat absorption and improve thermal comfort during warmer months. H. Parks should incorporate universal design principles and provide for a range of activities for people with disabilities. I. Parks should be designed to incorporate best practice principles of sustainable design, including natural heritage enhancement, naturalized stormwater management features, use of native plant species, incorporation of environmental education features and use of low maintenance and energy efficient facilities and landscapes. The reclamation of stormwater to assist in the ongoing maintenance of plantings within the park is encouraged. J. Plantings should generally consist of hardy and non- invasive native species and provide a transition between park green space and natural areas, where relevant. Page 143 43 Courtice Transit Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan Community park integrating gathering spaces, gardens, lawns and a library Central multi-purpose park serving a high-density neighbourhood 4.5.2. SPECIAL PARK The Special Park will be a prominent outdoor space in the heart of CTOC. It will be designed and programmed as a multi-purpose space that accommodates a range of outdoor activities and community events. A. The Special Park will have street frontage on at least three sides to ensure it is highly visible and accessible and park users feel safe. B. Most of the park should be vegetated with trees, lawns and gardens. Hardscaped areas should be integrated to support casual gatherings, special events, and seasonal food vendors/kiosks C. For maximum programming flexibility, the park should not include baseball diamonds, soccer pitches or other sports fields. Grassy areas, however, should allow for casual games. D. A playground for children of all ages should be included, and small dog park may also be considered. E. Smaller recreations facilities, such as a skating rink, a splash pad, a basketball court, tennis/paddle board courts (maximum 2) and a skateboard park may be considered F. The park may also include a community facility, such as a recreation centre, club house or library, provided the building and any associated parking/servicing areas do not occupy more than approximately 20% of the park. Page 144 44Urban Design and Sustainability Guidelines Neighbourhood park with skating rink 4.5.3. NEIGHBOURHOOD PARKS Neighbourhood Parks serve as social and recreational focal points of a neighbourhood, generally located within a 5-minute walk from the majority of residents. These parks play a key role in shaping each community’s unique identity through distinct design and landscaping. They provide a balance of active and passive uses, such as children’s playgrounds, skateboarding facilities, basketball courts, multi-use play courts, unlit sports fields, and social gathering spaces. Neighbourhood Parks meet the needs of the local community, and in some instances, may accommodate facilities serving the broader Courtice or Clarington community. Where possible, Neighbourhood Parks should be coordinated with elementary school sites to maximize efficiency and shared use. A. At least 50% of a Neighbourhood Park’s boundary, excluding where any portion of the boundary abutting an Environmental Protection Area, must abut a public street. B. Neighbourhood Park programming should include a diverse range of both passive and active recreational uses, and have flexibility to accommodate new uses and facilities over time. C. The North, West and East Neighbourhood Parks should be designed as an extension of and entry point to adjacent natural heritage areas, integrating trail connections and trailhead elements, such as waste bins, signage, maps and seating. D. Neighbourhood Parks should be designed to accommodate year-round use and should complement the amenities of nearby parks and open spaces. E. Neighbourhood Parks are the most appropriate locations for dog parks. Neighbourhood park with passive amenities and children’s play areas Page 145 45 Courtice Transit Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan Parkette featuring a playground and diverse plantings 4.5.4. PARKETTES Most parkettes will serve many of the same functions as Neighbourhood Parks but in a smaller area, and some may play a critical connecting role within the broader open space network. F. Parkettes should generally be centrally located with visible road frontage and defined entrances to create a highly visible and local gathering area for the neighbourhood. G. Parkettes should have frontage on at least two streets and may be located mid-block. H. Parkettes should generally be designed to: i. Be connected to buildings and sidewalks with landscaped pathways; ii. Create barrier-free environments for all users and adapt to both short and long-term needs of users; iii. Support year round use and prolong the daily and seasonal life of the space through illumination and weather protection; iv. Provide a comfortable microclimate for pedestrians, including maximum sunlight access. D. Parkettes should include grassy areas for casual recreation and may be appropriate for court sports, such as basketball, tennis or paddleboard. Parkette featuring seating, gardens and play elements Page 146 46Urban Design and Sustainability Guidelines Urban square with feature paving, seating and raised planters 4.5.5. URBAN SQUARES Urban Squares are more intimate gathering spaces that generally will be most appropriate in the high-density areas of CTOC, where they will provide relief from the massing of buildings and contribute to a vibrant public realm. They will create opportunities to expand the public realm of streets, providing room for relaxation in green space, socializing and outdoor dining. I. Urban Squares should have unique identities that enhance the character of an area. Fundamental elements, all of which should have a coordinated design and be durable, should include seating, lighting, trees and soft landscaping, low impact development features, public art, or other amenities that encourage casual use and gathering. J. The preferred location for an Urban Square will be at the corner of a block for maximum visibility and access. Mid-block squares with frontage on just one street or which extend through a block, however, may also be considered where they will be enlivened on all sides by restaurants, retail space or an office building lobby. K. Buildings adjacent to an Urban Square should front it with active ground-floor uses to give the space life and help make it feel safe. Restaurant patios should be allowed to encroach on the public space of the square. L. Grade-related residential units may front an Urban Square provided they are appropriately set back 3-5 metres to accommodate a buffer between the private and public realms. M. Urban Squares generally should feature mostly hardscaping to accommodate intensive use but should also incorporate significant greenery for beauty, shade and stormwater management. At a minimum, there should be trees and planting beds, and grassy areas should be considered. N. Seating will be a critical element in Urban Squares. In addition to benches, movable chairs and tables should be considered where squares are surrounded by retail and/or office uses.Urban square with skating rink Page 147 47 Courtice Transit Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan School with delineated drop off areas and pedestrian circulation C. Alternative standards for schools will be encouraged to ensure their form is compatible with the vision for CTOC and uses land efficiently. The standards should optimize the use of land by promoting multi-storey school buildings and minimizing parking and pick-up/drop-off areas. D. Community facilities are encouraged to connect, wherever possible, to active transportation systems to enhance overall connectivity. E. Where possible, partnerships between private landowners and public agencies, boards and commissions to achieve the integration of schools and other community facilities within mixed-use developments will be encouraged. F. Podium schools will be encouraged, particularly in higher-density and mixed-use contexts. These schools should be integrated within multi-storey buildings, with school functions located on lower levels and outdoor play areas accommodated through innovative design solutions, such as adjacent open spaces, terraces, or other areas designed to school board standards for accessibility and safety. 4.6. Schools and Other Community Facilities Community facilities are crucial to healthy and complete communities. These may include schools, recreation centres, child care centres, libraries and shared multi- purpose spaces. Based on the projected CTOC population, up to six elementary schools and two secondary schools may be required in the CTOC Area. Other specific community facilities will respond to the community’s needs as it grows. The clustering of facilities into community hubs for efficiencies and convenience will be encouraged. A. Elementary schools generally will be located centrally within neighbourhoods, with frontage on a Collector Road or Key Local Road, as identified in the CTOC Secondary Plan. Secondary schools generally will be located on Arterial Roads. B. Elementary schools and recreation centres are encouraged to be co-located with Neighbourhood Parks or Parkettes to facilitate the sharing of open space and reinforce such facilities as civic spaces. Crosstown Elementary School (Vancouver) Page 148 48Urban Design and Sustainability Guidelines Wildflower meadow providing a buffer between an environmental protection area and nearby houses G. Community facility design shall prioritize pedestrian connectivity and be accessible by various modes of transportation, including walking, cycling, and transit, with a specific emphasis on enhancing pedestrian safety. Elements which contribute to safety shall include: i. Visibly marked pedestrian crossings with appropriate lighting and signage; ii. Clearly delineated cycling connections should be provided from adjacent cycling lanes or multi-use paths to the facility;; iii. Pedestrian-oriented light standards to illuminate parking areas, driveways, and walkways; iv. Walkways to and through parking areas to provide routes separated from vehicle movements to reduce conflict points; v. Vehicular parking areas at the side or rear of the building, with the exception of accessible parking; vi. Pick-up and drop-off where it will minimize impacts on the pedestrian realm. H. Public buildings should achieve the highest standard of urban design and architectural quality, incorporating sustainable building features. 4.7. Environmental Protection Areas Environmental Protection Areas are recognized as the most significant components of the community’s natural environment and include natural heritage features, hydrologically sensitive features, lands within the regulatory flood plain of local watercourses and hazard lands associated with valley systems. A. While connectivity through Environmental Protection Areas is encouraged, trails should be directed outside of sensitive areas or to vegetation protection zones, and creek crossings should be minimized. B. Where parks, trails and adjacent development connect to Environmental Protection Areas, their interface, access, and usage should be managed in a way that preserves the area’s ecological integrity and adheres to the policies and guidelines of the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority (CLOCA). Vegetation protection zones are to be restored and enhanced. C. Developments adjacent to Environmental Protection Areas should optimize public exposure and views to them through the provision and incorporation of parks and trails to provide access and additional linkages to the natural heritage system. D. Development, including the road network, will consider drainage patterns and topography around Environmental Protection Areas, including limited watercourse crossings. Community centre with a gymnasium, multi-purpose rooms, an automated library and a daycare Page 149 5 GREEN DESIGN GUIDELINES The green design guidelines are intended to support environmental sustainability in the CTOC Secondary Plan Area through green building design, resource conservation, alternative energy sources, site and building performance, and conservation of natural areas. Progress toward achieving a low-carbon community relies on a holistic “green design” approach to infrastructure, buildings and landscapes. Page 150 50Urban Design and Sustainability Guidelines 5.1. Energy and Water Conservation Buildings and sites in the CTOC Secondary Plan Area should be designed to be energy and water efficient, rely on renewable and electric sources of energy, and conserve energy, water and other resources. Green development will help to reduce pollution and address climate change by reducing carbon emissions. A public district energy (DE) system to service CTOC, specifically the Mixed Use Core and Mixed Use Transition, may be implemented for efficiencies, cost savings and reduced carbon emissions in powering, heating and cooling buildings, in which case, future development would be required by the CTOC Secondary Plan to connect to the DE system (or be DE ready if development precedes the system being in place). The guidelines below should be considered whether DE is implemented or not. A. Buildings should be designed with high performance envelopes. B. Energy efficiency should be promoted through site and building designs that provide opportunities for passive design strategies and maximize the potential for passive solar and natural ventilation. C. South facing roofs should be designed to accommodate solar panels by maximizing flat expanses of roof with no penetrations or articulated rooflines. D. Low-carbon and sustainable material alternatives should be considered for the proposed structure or envelope of buildings. E. Green building material standards should be considered to reduce the impact on the environment and ensure materials are purchased/obtained from responsible ethical sources; and, where possible, materials should be sourced from certified local businesses. F. Buildings should incorporate energy saving measures such as window shading, daylight design, daylight sensors, heat recovery ventilation, high efficiency mechanical equipment, and energy efficient appliances and lighting. G. Building systems should be set up to automatically turn off major lighting after hours or close blinds once the sun has set to reduce energy use and minimize interference with the flight patterns of migratory birds. H. Buildings should be designed to use water efficiently through such measures as ultra-low flow fixtures, waterless urinals, dual flush toilets, and grey-water recycling. I. Buildings should use electric sources of hot water heating as well as water heat recovery technologies. J. If a DE system is not implemented, renewable energy sources for all or some of a building’s energy, heat and cooling needs is encouraged. If not integrated at the time of construction, provisions for future installations should be considered. K. Renewable energy use to reduce electric energy supply in the public realm, such as solar-powered lighting for trails and parks and open spaces, is encouraged. L. Green roofs should be considered for office, industrial and multi-unit residential buildings. Where green roofs are not provided, reflective or light-coloured roofs should be incorporated for medium and high density residential buildings in order to reduce solar heat absorption and energy demand. Bioretention area along a local street Page 151 51 Courtice Transit Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan 5.2 Landscapes and Stormwater Management Development in the CTOC Secondary Plan Area should incorporate landscapes and stormwater management techniques that manage all stormwater on-site and reflect natural processes. Naturalized site and public realm design serves to facilitate runoff infiltration and promote sustainability by providing habitat and enhancing ecosystem functions, thereby contributing to the community’s overall environmental health. A. Low-Impact Development techniques are encouraged, such as naturalized stormwater management ponds, bioswales, infiltration trenches, vegetated filter strips, and permeable materials to manage stormwater. B. Landscaping should feature native and adaptive, non- invasive species that are drought-tolerant and require little or no irrigation. It should reflect natural plant associations to minimize maintenance, create natural habitats for bird and pollinator species, and enhance biodiversity. C. Landscaped areas should be located to optimize the potential of water infiltration. D. Bio-retention areas, both on publicly and privately- owned lands, are encouraged to capture and treat stormwater runoff, where feasible. They can be integrated into a range of landscape areas including medians and boulevards. A variety of planting and landscape treatments should be employed to provide wildlife habitat. E. Stormwater facilities should be designed as significant landscape features that provide neighbourhood amenities while achieving functional objectives related to stormwater flow moderation and water quality. F. Stormwater management ponds should be designed to blend with the natural landscape, featuring grading for natural and variable side slopes and curved contours. Inlet and outlet structures should be concealed through a combination of planting, grading, and natural stone to create a seamless integration with the surrounding environment. G. Stormwater management ponds should be accessible to pedestrians and cyclists via trails that are part of, or provide connections to, the broader trail network. H. Stormwater management ponds should be integrated, wherever feasible, with parkland and treated as an extension of the parks and open space system. They are not permitted within Environmental Protection Areas. I. Where development is adjacent to a stormwater management pond, access for maintenance shall be provided. J. Where there is a need to discourage public access to areas around the perimeter of the stormwater management ponds, living fences and barrier planting should be used in place of, or to visually disguise, fencing. K. Stormwater channels may be designed with meandering and naturalized slopes in designated parks including the Central, West, North and East Neighbourhood Parks. L. Vegetated filter strips are preferred, where feasible, to treat runoff from roads, roof downspouts and low traffic parking areas, and can be used for snow storage. M. Bioswales are encouraged, where feasible, particularly for treating road runoff outside high-density urban areas. Naturalized stormwater pond with trail Page 152 52Urban Design and Sustainability Guidelines S. Permeable paving and other pervious surface materials for hard landscaping and on-site parking may be considered to maximize water groundwater infiltration and water quality treatment. N. Designated snow storage areas should be provided through the CTOC Area to limit the entry of salt and other substances into the stormwater sewer system. They are encouraged to be in filter strips and bioswales. O. Rainwater harvesting systems are encouraged, where appropriate, and should incorporate treatment technologies to improve the quality of rainwater before and/or after storage while also accounting for both insufficient and excessive rainfall. P. Rainwater collection for reuse within buildings and/ or for irrigation purposes is encouraged wherever possible. Q. Rain gardens are encouraged to detain, infiltrate and filter runoff discharge from roof leaders. They should be installed in areas where soil permeability is high and designed to complement the landscape, on a base of granular material and with tolerant plant material. R. Green roofs are encouraged throughout the CTOC Area, to absorb rainwater and reduce stormwater runoff, provide additional insulation to the building envelope, and create habitat for wildlife. The use of native, low-maintenance plant species is encouraged, and biodiverse green roofs should be considered to support pollinator species where possible. Rain garden within streetscape Green roof on rooftop terrace Page 153 Page 154 Amendment No. 1 to the Durham Region Official Plan Purpose: The purpose of this Amendment is to remove a portion of the 2051 Urban Expansion Areas overlay and slightly modify the Courtice Protected Major Transit Station Area (PMTSA) boundary to limit the boundary from extending east of the Tooley Creek valley. This Amendment will facilitate the creation of a new Courtice Transit- Oriented Community Secondary Plan in the Clarington Official Plan. The Courtice Transit-Oriented Community Secondary Plan is centred on the future Courtice GO Transit Station and includes lands delineated as a PMTSA. The Secondary Plan will feature a diverse range of housing with a mix of densities, along with new schools, community facilities, office space, commercial uses, and institutional uses that will capitalize on the excellent transportation access to the area. The Secondary Plan also prioritizes the protection of the Robinson and Tooley Creeks and associated natural environment. Location: This Amendment applies to an area (approximately 15 hectares) within the Courtice Transit-Oriented Community Secondary Plan, specifically the lands east of Courtice Road and south of Bloor Street. In addition, the Amendment applies to a small area east of Courtice Road and north and south of Baseline Road. Basis: The Courtice Transit-Oriented Community Secondary Plan area boundary includes some lands east of Courtice Road and south of Bloor Street that are designated Community Areas within the 2051 Urban Expansion Areas. Lands within the 2051 Urban Expansion Areas were added to the Urban Boundary through the latest Regional Municipal Comprehensive Review, Envision Durham, and represent new land within the urban system for the purpose of facilitating development. Envision Durham directs that detailed planning for lands within the 2051 Urban Expansion Areas be done primarily through secondary plans. Expanding the boundary to include these lands supports a coordinated approach to planning for residential lands near the future Courtice GO Station. These lands were incorporated and analyzed within the Functional Servicing Study and Transportation Impact Study, undertaken as part of the Secondary Plan process, to ensure infrastructure is effectively planned to support th e expanded area. Attachment 2 to Report PDS-066-25 Page 155 Actual Amendment: Unless otherwise indicated, in the Amendment, newly added text is shown with underlining, and deleted text is shown with a strike- through. 1. Existing Region of Durham Official Plan, Table 6 Regional Road Right-of-Way Requirements, is amended by changing the Right-of- Way Width for Courtice Road, from Hwy. 401 Westbound Ramps to Regional Hwy. 2, to a 45 metre right-of-way width. 2. Existing Region of Durham Official Plan, Map 1 Regional Structure – Urban and Rural Systems, is amended by removing a portion of the 2051 Urban Expansion Areas overlay for lands within the Courtice Transit-Oriented Community Secondary Plan area as shown on Exhibit A attached hereto and forming part of this amendment. The revised 2051 Urban Expansion Areas overlay is reflected on all subsequent exhibits and is intended to be reflected on all other maps in the Official Plan. 3. Existing Region of Durham Official Plan, Map 1 Regional Structure – Urban and Rural Systems, is further amended by slightly revising the Courtice Protected Major Transit Station Area boundary to limit the boundary from extending east of the Tooley Creek Valley as shown on Exhibit A. The revised Courtice Protected Major Transit Station Area boundary is intended to be reflected on all other maps in the Official Plan. 4. Existing Region of Durham Official Plan, Map 3e Regional Road Right-of-Way Requirements, is amended by changing Courtice Road, from Hwy. 401 Westbound Ramps to Regional Hwy. 2, to a 45-metre right-of-way width as shown on Exhibit B. Page 156 * ** * ** ** ** * ** ** ** ** ** * * N× * * * * Hydro Line Hydro Line Hydro Line Hydr o L i n e Hydro Line Hydro Li n e TransCanadaGas Pipeline Trans-NorthernOil Pipeline TransCa n a d aGas Pip e l i n e Pipeline Pipeline NGS NGS C.N.R. KingstonC.N.R. Kingston/GO C.N.R . B a l a C.N . R . B a l a Y.D.H.R C.P.R . H a v e l o c k C.P.R. B e l l e v i l l e C.P.R. Havelock We s t n e y R d Whites Rd Baseline Rd Ganaraska Rd Br o c k R d Th i c k s o n R d Bowmanville Av St e v e n s o n R d Brock St Bloor St Taunton Rd En f i e l d R d Winchester Rd To w n l i n e R d Re g i o n a l R d 1 La k e R i d g e R d Regional Rd 15 KingstonRd Li b e r t y S t Ha r m o n y R d King Av RegionalRd23 Al t o n a R d Alexander Knox Rd Co u r t i c e R d Seventh Con Rd Th o r n t o n R d Ho p k i n s S t Regional Rd 18 Finch Av An d e r s o n S t Mi l l S t Regional Rd 39 Reach St Third Con Rd Regional Rd 20 Ninth Con Rd Baldwin St Regional Hwy 48 Rossland Rd Bayly St Dundas St Co n 3 Regional Hwy 2 Regional Rd 6 Salem Rd Ch u r c h S t Goodwood Rd Ri t s o n R d Myrtle Rd Regional Rd 12 Si m c o e S t Regional Hwy 2 Regional Rd 3 Da r l i n g t o n - C l a r k e T o w n l i n e R d Yo r k D u r h a m L i n e Regional Rd 10 Isl a n d R d Regional Rd 19 Nash Rd Columbus Rd Regional Rd 8 Shirley Rd Victoria St Regional Rd 21 Regional Rd57 Zephyr Rd Sandford Rd Regional Rd 13 Regional Hwy 47 Si m c o e S t Regional Hwy 47 A B C D D E E S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S 12 13 18 29 31 32 33 30 14 26 07 22 19 11 17 20 15 23 16 28 21 24 05 02 01 03 27 34 35 08 36 10 4 09 Leaskdale Cherrywood GreenRiver Whitevale Brougham Greenwood Kinsale Balsam MitchellCorners Haydon Tyrone Caesarea Nestleton Solina MapleGrove Newtonville MacedonianVillage Ashburn Myrtle MyrtleStation Brownsville Burketon Enfield Enniskillen Hampton KendalKirby Leskard Raglan Glasgow Goodwood CoppinsCorner Siloam SandyHook Sanford Zephyr Udora Utica Manchester Epsom Greenbank Seagrave Blackstock NestletonStation Sonya Manilla Wilfrid PortBolster Gamebridge Claremont #1 #2 #3A #3B #1 #3 #2 N o r t h u m b e r l a n d C o u n t y Simcoe County Regional Municipality of York P e t e r b o r o u g h Co u n t y C i t y o f T o r o n t o City of Kawartha Lakes Scugog Uxbridge Ajax Pickering Whitby Oshawa Clarington Brock D1 401 401 401 401 35 115 35 115 77 48 7A 7A 127 7 12 127 407 407 412 407 12 12 7 418 Mississaugas of Scugog Island First Nation 0 5 10 15 Kilometres Regional Structure – Urban & Rural Systems Map 1. Official Plan of the Regional Municipality of Durham Lake Simcoe Lake S c u g o g Lake Ontario Note: 1) This map forms part of the Official Plan of The Regional Municipality of Durham and must be read in conjunction with the text. 2) Roads are for reference purposes only. 3) Regional Official Plan Consolidation December 13, 2024. Sources: 1) Greenbelt Boundary (Urban River Valley removed): Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, © King's Printer for Ontario, 2022. Reproduced with permission. 2) Oak Ridges Moraine data: Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, © King's Printer for Ontario, 2006. Reproduced with permission. Specific Policy Areas Special Study Areas Special Areas Municipal ServiceS Nuclear Generating StationNGS Future Airport Existing Airport Rail Proposed GO Rail Existing GO Rail Proposed GO Station Existing GO Station Infrastructure Prime Agricultural Areas Shoreline Residential Rural Employment Areas Country Residential Subdivision Hamlets Rural System Greenbelt Boundary(excluding Urban River Valleys) Oak Ridges Moraine Waterfront Areas Major Open Space Areas Greenlands System Former Hamlet Areas Delineated Built Boundary Rapid Transit Corridor - Employment Employment Areas Community Areas Waterfront Place Rural Regional Centres Regional Corridor Rapid Transit Corridor Regional Centres UGC / PMTSA Overlap Protected Major Transit Station Area (PMTSA) Urban Growth Centres (UGC) 2051 Urban Expansion Areas Urban Area Boundary Urban System Revise PMTSA Boundary Exhibit 'A', Amendment No. 1 To the Region of Durham Official Plan, Map 1. NGS C.N.R. Kingston Bloor St Regional Hwy 2 S MapleGrove #2 Remove 2051 Urban Expansion Areas Overlay Remove 2051 Urban Expansion Areas Overlay Revise PMTSA Boundary ZOOM IN OF AREA BELOW Page 157 * ** * ** ** ** * ** ** ** ** ** * * N× * * * * Li b e r t y S t Westney Rd Whites Rd Baseline Rd Br o c k R d Th i c k s o n R d Bo w m a n v i l l e A v Ma i n S t St e v e n s o n R d Brock St Cameron St Ganaraska RdSim c o e S t Ri t s o n R d Co u r t i c e R d Bloor St Simcoe St Ma i n S t Taunton Rd Rossland Rd En f i e l d R d TorontoSt Winchester Rd Victoria St To w n l i n e R d La k e R i d g e R d Kingston Rd Ha r m o n y R d King Av KingSt Al t o n a R d Yo r k D u r h a m L i Raglan Rd Si m c o e S t Finch Av Nash Rd Reach St Br o c k S t Ninth Concession Rd BaldwinSt Dundas St Co n c e s s i o n 3 SalemRd Goodwood Rd Myrtle Rd Columbus Road Da r l i n g t o n - C l a r k e T o w n l i n e R d Bayly St Isla n d R d Shirley Rd Zephyr Rd Sandford Rd La k e R i d g e R d Ravenshoe Rd Seventh Concession Rd C.N.R. Kingston/GO C.N.R . B a l a C.N . R . B a l a Y.D.H.R C.P.R . H a v e l o c k C.P.R. B e l l e v i l l e C.P.R. Havelock N o r t h u m b e r l a n d C o u n t y Simcoe County Regional Municipality of York P e t e r b o r o u g h Co u n t y C i t y o f T o r o n t o City of Kawartha Lakes Scugog Uxbridge Ajax Whitby Oshawa Clarington Brock Pickering 2 30 27 38 37 4 22 31 23 5 1 5 3 226 12 4 36 54 60 16 35 55 34 3 57 20 4 9 2 42 14 18 2 6 2 47 8 577 21 57 2 13 39 1 11 8 47 47 30 1 23 48 23 10 2 50 15 23 12 23 13 13 23 39 21 19 27 26 28 3341 4 17 8 1 57 22 8 3 33 1 53 23 58 52 40 28 401 401 401 401 35 115 35 115 77 48 7A 7A 127 7 12 127 407 407 412 407 12 12 7 418 Regional Road Right-of-Way Requirements 0 5 10 15 Kilometres Official Plan of the Regional Municipality of Durham Lake Simcoe Lake S c u g o g Map 3e. Mississaugas of Scugog Island First Nation Lake Ontario Notes: 1) This map forms part of the Official Plan of the Regional Municipality of Durham and must be read in conjunction with the text. 2) Additional arterial road designations within or adjacent to '2051 Urban Expansion Areas' may be identified through a future update to the Durham Transportation Master Plan. 3) In addition to existing and future Regional roads, this map includes right-of-way requirements for sections of Dundas Street in Whitby and King/Bond Streets in Oshawa under area municipal jurisdiction, and sections of area municipal roads that are planned to become Regional roads as part of future road extensions. 4) The alignments of certain future arterial road designations are approximate, and are subject to more detailed planning and engineering studies to determine their location. 5) Regional Official Plan Consolidation December 13, 2024. *Refer to Table 6 for section descriptions and exceptions 42-45 34-42 30-34, 30-36, 32-36 26-30 20-22, 20-26 26-32 Existing Road Right-of-Way Width Ranges (in metres)* 2051 Urban Expansion Areas Urban Area Hamlet Boundary Regional roadunder York or KawarthaLakes jurisdiction Regional Road Regional Highway Existing Road Future Road Specific Right-of-Way Width (in metres)* 45 40, 42 37, 38 32, 33 20, 23 36 30 26, 28 Exhibit 'B', Amendment No. 1 To the Region of Durham Official Plan, Map 1. Change to 45 metre right-of-way width Page 158 Sequence of Events Summary Date Event December 11, 2018 Steering Committee Meeting #1: Kick-off Meeting June 18, 2018 Public Meeting Report Council authorization to initiate May 10, 2019 Steering Committee Meeting #2 June 18, 2019 Public Information Centre #1 August 27, 2019 Steering Committee Meeting #3 May 13, 2020 Landowner Group Meeting September 29, 2020 Public Information Centre #2 June 29, 2021 Steering Committee Meeting #4 February 10, 2022 Steering Committee Meeting #5 March 22, 2022 Public Information Centre #3 March 22, 2022 Stakeholder Workshop October 13, 2022 Landowner Group Meeting March 2023 Landowner Design Concept Meetings November 6, 2023 Public Information Centre #4 December 14, 2023 Landowner Group Meeting May 16, 2024 Landowner Group Meeting August 22, 2024 Landowner Group Meeting December 12, 2024 Landowner Group Meeting April 10, 2025 Steering Committee Meeting #6 May 22, 2025 Notice of Statutory Public Meeting sent to Interested Parties May 30, 2025 Draft OPA and Secondary Plan materials available to the public June 19, 2025 Statutory Public Meeting July 22, 2025 Landowner Group Meeting December 8, 2025 Planning and Development Committee Meeting and Recommendation Report to Council Attachment 3 to Report PDS-066-25 Page 159 Courtice Transit-Oriented Community Secondary Plan – Summary of Technical Reports Report Key Findings and Next Steps Stage 1 Summary Report Prepared by Urban Strategies Inc. August 2019 This report includes an overview of the work completed since project initiation, including: analysis of the policy context, consultation summary, preliminary technical analysis of the existing conditions, identification of the key issues and opportunities and development of the preliminary guiding principles. Cultural Heritage Assessment Report Prepared by Golder Associates Limited August 2019 The report provides an overview of heritage legislation and policies in Ontario, an outline of the methods used to investigate and evaluate cultural heritage resources, and a summary of the historical development and existing conditions. Properties with buildings or structures 40 or more years old were field documented and evaluated as having potential cultural heritage value or interest if they met one or more of the criteria prescribed in O. Reg. 9/06. The second part of this report identifies and assesses the potential direct and indirect impacts on known and potential cultural heritage resources. The following was identified within the Courtice Employment Lands study area: -Two (2) properties listed (not designated) on the Heritage Inventory -Eleven (11) properties of potential cultural heritage value or interest -Four (4) potential cultural heritage landscapes Recommendations to avoid or reduce adverse impacts to each cultural heritage resource in study area are provided in the report. Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment Report Prepared by Golder Associated Limited August 2019 The objective of the Stage 1 archaeological assessment was to compile available information about the known and potential archaeological resources within the study area and to determine if a field survey (Stage 2) is required. 60 archaeological sites have been identified within a 1 km radius of the study area. Areas that have been subject to previous assessment and cleared of archaeological potential no longer exhibit archaeological potential. No further archaeological assessment of these areas is recommended. Areas that have been identified as cemeteries or burial grounds retain archaeological potential and are recommended for Stage 2 Attachment 4 to Report PDS-066-25 Page 160 archaeological assessment. Areas identified as retaining archaeological potential are recommended for Stage 2 archaeological assessment prior to ground disturbance. Transportation Impact Assessment Report Prepared by CIMA+ August 2019 The Transportation Impact Assessment Report document s existing conditions, as of 2019, related to the road network, intersections, and transit. The Report then details planned area network changes for freeways and interchanges, the arterial and collector road network, provincial (GO Transit) and regional transit (BRT) facilities and active transportation. Servicing Existing Conditions, Opportunities and Constraints Report Prepared by CIMA+ August 2019 The report purpose is to summarize the existing and previously planned municipal infrastructure that will provide water, wastewater and stormwater management services to future development within the study area. The Regional Municipal of Durham (Durham) is responsible for the delivery of municipal water and wastewater services across Durham Region, while stormwater infrastructure is the responsibility of the Municipality of Clarington. There are no major constraints associated with the provision of water servicing to support growth within the study area. The existing facilities have been planned to support growth and over the long-term the planned projects will provide a feedermain system capable of supplying water to local watermains in the study area to support development. The planned trunk wastewater infrastructure within the study area will provide the framework for a network of local sanitary sewers to service development within the area. Stormwater Management (SWM) objectives for the study area are to be confirmed through the completion of a subwatershed study for the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek catchment areas (which has since been completed). Courtice Employment Lands Secondary Plan: Employment Growth Outlook Prepared by Hemson December 2020 This report analyzes job growth, employment land uses and the economic structure of Clarington, Durham Region and the GTHA with a view of understanding the potential growth outlook for the Courtice Employment Lands (CEL) Secondary Plan area. Sustainability Best Practices Report Prepared by Urban Strategies Inc. August 2021 This report informs the Courtice Employment Lands and MTSA Secondary Plan (now Courtice Transit-Oriented Community) by describing best practices in sustainability and green development. The findings of this report will be used in subsequent project phases. The best practice precedents fall into three categories: 1) Transit-Oriented Communities 2) Urban Centres Page 161 3) Employment Districts Key themes: - Integration of uses: Incorporate a wide mix of uses that are all in close proximity to one another. - Supporting transit and active transportation: An urban form that is efficient for commuting. - Protecting natural features and functions: Ensuring development does not have adverse impacts on the surrounding natural environment. - Linkages to the natural environment and accessible, useable open spaces: Strengthening the social sustainability of a community. - Stormwater management and green infrastructure: Implementing alternative stormwater management techniques such as low-impact development (LID). - Green development standards: Opportunities to encourage high levels of energy performance at the district/building scales. - District energy: Potential for system that distributes thermal energy to multiple buildings in an area. Draft Preferred Land Use Plan and Key Policy Directions Prepared by Urban Strategies Inc. June 2023 This document summarizes the draft preferred land use plan, which is comprised of the following land uses: - A mixed-use core provides the broadest mix of residential, office, retail, and institutional uses at high densities. - The core transition area features predominantly residential uses at medium and high density, with some commercial uses. - Transit-oriented neighbourhood designation provides low-rise housing at medium densities, with small-scale retail permitted on major road intersections. - Outer neighbourhood designation allows for a mixture of lower-density and low-rise residential, with small-scale retail permitted on major road intersections. - Institutional overlay is an appropriate location for public uses requiring larger sites including schools, community centres, and community parks. - Mixed use office district features office and other employment uses in a campus-like setting. - The industrial area designation features a mixture of non-noxious employment uses. Summary of draft policy directions - Local and collector streets will form an interconnected network and a grid pattern within the MTSA. Page 162 - Within the MTSA, buildings shall frame public streets, with tall buildings taking podium and tower form. Underground parking is encouraged. - Parks and public open spaces will comprise a minimum of 10% of the net developable area. Four primary Neighbourhood Parks are identified on the Draft Land Use Plan. - Anticipated requirement of six primary schools and two secondary schools Functional Servicing Report Prepared by CIMA+ February 2024 An analysis of servicing needs was completed through a Functional Servicing Study Report. Currently, there is limited water distribution infrastructure within the Secondary Plan area. The Region of Durham has planned projects to provide additional feedermain capacity to support growth within the Secondary Plan area. The undeveloped lands in the Secondary Plan area are within a catchment area that will flow directly to the Courtice Water Pollution Control Plant (WPCP) by gravity via the Courtice Trunk Sanitary Sewer (CTSS), a planned project by the Region of Durham. The development of a local sanitary sewer network that will drain to the planned trunk and sub-trunk sanitary sewer will likely influence the sequence and progression of development in the area. The study area is located within the watersheds of Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek. The lands generally drain towards Robinson and Tooley Creeks via roadside ditches and smaller drainage courses that follow the natural topography of the area. Stormwater Management (SWM) objectives and a preferred SWM strategy have been established through the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Subwatershed Study prepared by Aquafor Beech Limited. Traditional Stormwater Management combined with Low Impact Development measures was identified as the preferred strategy. Transportation Impact Study Prepared by CIMA+ September 2025 A Transportation Impact Study assessed the proposed transportation network and intersection operations within the study area and provided recommendations to inform future areas of study. The key recommendations include: - Establish the proposed road network as the basis of the Courtice Transit-Oriented Community Secondary Plan area. - Implement transportation network upgrades in phases aligned with development, while monitoring operational performance as the area builds out. - Coordinate with the Ministry of Transportation and the Regional Municipality of Durham to determine Page 163 necessary improvements at the Highway 401 and Courtice Road interchange. - Initiate the environmental assessment for the Trulls Road grade separation and designate the area as a Special Study Area in the Secondary Plan. - Update traffic forecasts as more detailed information becomes available to refine required road network changes. Page 164 Public Comment Summary Table – Revised Submission Number Details of Submission Staff Response S-1 Michael Testaguzza (The Biglieri Group Ltd.) on behalf of Courtice Cigas LP (71 Cigas Road) Schedule A/ Land Use Plan and Schedule C/Roads and Active Transportation Network: TBG notes that Schedules “A” - “C” are unclear with respect to the location of land use designations and other pertinent secondary plan elements relative to the existing property fabric and the existing road network south of the CPKC rail corridor. An example, being the limits of the CPKC Rail Corridor Utility on Schedule “A” or the alignment of existing Cigas Road and Marine Drive on Schedules “B” and “C”. We request that the Schedules be reviewed and refined in this regard. Schedules revised with the CPKC Rail Corridor being refined for clarity. S-1 From our review, the land use designation for the Subject Site is therefore unclear. It is clear that the lands generally fall within the Mixed Use Core area. However, it is uncertain if a portion, or a majority of the Site, is designated Neighbourhood Park. We request confirmation of the location of the proposed Neighbourhood Park through the Schedule refinements requested above. We would like to note that our Client is in opposition to provision of parkland on their Site beyond the statutory minimums of the Planning Act. Schedules revised as requested to improve clarity. In addition, the Neighbourhood Park is now shown as a “P” symbol, which provides more flexibility with regards to location and configuration. S-1 Further to above, it is our opinion that the Site is ideally located to facilitate transit supportive mixed -use intensification as directed by the PPS as it is located immediately south of the proposed GO Station. Compact mixed-use intensification there-on will therefore support the viability of the proposed GO Station, optimize the planned investment in transit infrastructure, and finally support use of alternative modes of transportation including public transit and active transportation. As such, the Site should be largely designated Mixed Use Core on Schedule “A”. The site is designated Mixed Use Core on Schedule A. S-1 TBG notes that the Neighborhood Park shown on Schedules “A” - “B” is located in proximity to the Subject Site. On lands south of the corridor, where an existing finer grain lot fabric exists, TBG encourages staff to ensure that community elements such as schools, parks, and key active transportation connections are The Neighbourhood Park is now shown as a “P” symbol, which provides more flexibility with regards to location and configuration. Attachment 5 to Report PDS-066-25 Page 165 appropriately located relative to the lot fabric to ensure expedient development. For example, the amount of parkland to be taken from any specific individual site (or group of commonly held sites) should not exceed the maximums as stipulated in the Planning Act, with adequate park sizes to be achieved through co -location of parkland contributions on adjacent lands. This would conform to the intent of draft policy 8.2.1 of the CTOC SP. S-1 Lastly, policy language in draft section 8.4 of the CTOC SP should be augmented to provide for greater flexibility in the size and location of parks and community facilities – allowing for revisions to the location and size of parks without amendment to th e plan. The overly specific size criteria found in policy 8.4.3 should be removed. Additional policies should also be added to this section directing for co-location of parkland dedication as noted above. It is appropriate for the Secondary Plan to specify size criteria for different classifications of parks. S-1 Coincident with review of the lot fabric as described above, TBG requests that Staff more particularly consider the precise location of the “Key Active Transportation Connection” crossing of the Rail Corridor as shown on Schedule “A” - “C”. TBG believes that the crossing should leverage GO Station infrastructure improvements such as the proposed tunnel to the station platforms or the planned upgrading of the existing – both of which TBG understands to be located further east. Based on the information available to the Municipality of Clarington, the Key Active Transportation Connection is appropriately located. Minor modifications to the alignment based on future detailed planning and engineering studies does not require an amendment to the Secondary Plan. S-1 TBG further requests confirmation in the policy language that where the Key Active Transportation Connection is co -located with a Neighbourhood Park, that said Key Active Transportation Connection would form part of the Neighbourhood Park. This can be further clarified in draft policy 10.7.1. Correct. S-1 TBG notes that the Road Network shown on Schedule “C” does not delineate between existing Cigas Road and Marnie Drive and planned new local roads. Such distinction should be included in the Schedules. These existing roads should also be included in the Table located in draft policy 10.2.2. This would in turn confirm that Cigas Road and Marnie Drive are expected to remain through redevelopment of the lands south of the rail corridor. It is TBGs opinion, as expressed above, that lands south of the rail corridor should be planned to build upon the existing road network (and lot Schedule C revised to show an expected future configuration of Cigas Road and Marnie Drive. Page 166 fabric) to facilitate expedient development in the vicinity of the planned GO Station. Conversely, not including the existing road network (and lot fabric) in the Scehdules will lead to confusion in interpretation and implementation. This may in turn resul t in the requirement for large scale lot consolidation as a pre -condition to feasible development – delaying implementation of transit supportive development in the PMTSA unnecessarily. S-1 TBG would like to confirm that the minimum 10% office or institutional requirement outlined in draft policy 5.3.4 will be reviewed on a block-by-block, rather than site-by-site basis. TBG does not support a site-by-site parameter as it would unduly restrict development within the PMTSA. Further, TBG believes that the minimum 10% should be revised to include the full range of non-residential uses such as community facilities, amenities, and the full range of commercially permissible uses. Policy 5.3.4 specifies that office or institutional uses shall occupy 10% of the total gross floor area of all buildings located on each block, or portion of a block. S-1 The Subject Site is within a PMTSA and accordingly per the provisions of the Planning Act, minimum parking rates cannot be included in any implementing by-law. In the interest of clarity, the text of the CTOC should recognize this in section 10. The Secondary Plan does not include minimum parking rates. S-2 Michael Testaguzza (The Biglieri Group Ltd.) on behalf of Courtice Baseline LP (1720 Baseline Road) TBG notes that Schedules “A” - “C” are unclear with respect to the location of land use designations and other pertinent secondary plan elements relative to the existing property fabric and the existing road network south of the CPKC rail corridor. An exam ple, being the limits of the CPKC Rail Corridor Utility on Schedule “A” or the alignment of existing Cigas Road and Marine Drive on Schedules “B” and “C”. We request that the Schedules be reviewed and refined in this regard. Schedules revised with the CPKC Rail Corridor being refined for clarity. S-2 From our review, the land use designation for the Subject Site appears to be Mixed Use Core on Schedule “A”. We requested that staff confirm same. Further, we would like staff to confirm that the parkette (‘P’) symbol is not located on the Site. The Subject Site is designated Mixed Use Core. As per policy 8.4.2, the location, size and configuration of Parkettes will be determined at the time of development applications, guided by the general locations identified on Schedule B. Page 167 In addition, as shown in Schedule A, a new South Core Redevelopment Area has been identified. This area includes the lands located between Trulls Road and Courtice Road, south of the CPKC Rail Corridor and north of Baseline Road. S-2 Policy language in draft section 8.4 of the CTOC SP should be augmented to provide for greater flexibility in the size and location of parks and community facilities – allowing for revisions to the location and size of parks without amendment to the plan. The overly specific size criteria found in policy 8.4.3 should be removed. It is appropriate for the Secondary Plan to specify size criteria for different classifications of parks. S-2 TBG notes that the Road Network shown on Schedule “C” does not delineate between existing Cigas Road and Marnie Drive and planned new local roads. Such distinction should be included in the Schedules. These existing roads should also be included in the Table located in draft policy 10.2.2. This would in turn confirm that Cigas Road and Marnie Drive are expected to remain through redevelopment of the lands south of the rail corridor. It is TBGs opinion, as expressed above, that lands south of the rail corrid or should be planned to build upon the existing road network (and lot fabric) to facilitate expedient development in the vicinity of the planned GO Station. Conversely, not including the existing road network (and lot fabric) in the Scehdules will lead to confusion in interpretation and implementation. This may in turn result in the requirement for large scale lot consolidation as a pre -condition to feasible development – delaying implementation of transit supportive development in the PMTSA unnecessarily. Schedule C revised to show an expected future configuration of Cigas Road and Marnie Drive. S-2 TBG would like to confirm that the minimum 10% office or institutional requirement outlined in draft policy 5.3.4 will be reviewed on a block-by-block, rather than site-by-site basis. TBG does not support a site-by-site parameter as it would unduly restrict development within the PMTSA. Further, TBG believes that the minimum 10% should be revised to include the full range of non-residential uses such as community facilities, amenities, and the full range of commercially permissible uses. Policy 5.3.4 specifies that office or institutional uses shall occupy 10% of the total gross floor area of all buildings located on each block, or portion of a block. Page 168 S-2 The Subject Site is within a PMTSA and accordingly per the provisions of the Planning Act, minimum parking rates cannot be included in any implementing by-law. In the interest of clarity, the text of the CTOC should recognize this in section 10. The Secondary Plan does not include minimum parking rates. S-3 Melissa Whitefield Expressed concerns regarding high -density, crime, and transportation. Melissa questioned why Clarington is entertaining a 40-storey building and what the plan is to recruit new homeowners to occupy the new buildings. M. Whitefield expressed concerns regarding lending rates and first-time home buyers not able to afford a home and the development of a parkette, not a proper park for the area. Expressed concerns regarding the housing target and where the funds go if the target is not met. The Courtice Transit-Oriented Community Secondary Plan area has been identified as a Protected Major Transit Station Area (PMTSA) in the Regional Official Plan. This designation, which comes from the Provincial Planning Statement, 2024, means the province expects the area to support transit and accommodate higher population and employment densities. This Secondary Plan ensures future development is well-coordinated, with the right infrastructure, housing, and community services to meet the needs of residents. Future residential and mixed-use neighbourhoods will be organized around four primary neighbourhood parks and six elementary schools, complemented by a network of smaller parks and parkettes. In addition, a central Special Park will serve as a gathering place and civic destination for all Courtice residents. S-4 Chris Barnett (Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP) on behalf of the CTOC Landowner Group The letter expresses concerns that the CTOC landowner group’s comments with respect to policy 10.5.3 relating to private streets have not been addressed. In particular, the policy as presently drafted does not take into consideration the purpose of private roads, as well as the ownership structure related to such roads. The policy reference to private roads as being “necessary to enhance vehicular and pedestrian permeability” appear to contemplate that such roads are generally available for vehicular Policy 10.5.3 revised: “Private streets are vehicular connections between public streets that are deemed necessary to enhance vehicular and pedestrian permeability. Private streets may be permitted through the development application process subject to the following to the satisfaction of the Page 169 and pedestrian access. While the circumstances for each road will be different, and there may be circumstances where access to the roads might be available, there also may be circumstances where such roads are only accessible to owners. The policy language that suggests otherwise is therefore inaccurate and may give rise to expectations of access that may not be possible. Municipality provided: a) They have features common to public streets; and b) Meet functional requirements to the satisfaction of the Municipality. a) They include pedestrian amenities such as sidewalks, lighting and street trees or other plantings; b) Access points to parking spaces shall meet municipal road standards; c)No buildings or off-street parking spaces shall encroach into the private street right-of-way; and d)The developer shall provide for the future transfer of the rights-of-way to the Municipality at the Municipality’s discretion. S-4 Further, the reference in 10.5.3 b) to access to parking spaces “shall meet municipal road standards” also may not be appropriate. Private roads are frequently implemented in circumstances where municipal stan ards are not intended to be met, and a policy direction otherwise is not appropriate. Part b) of policy 10.5.3 deleted. S-4 The requirement in 10.5.3 d) that the developer “shall” provide for the future transfer to owners of units, making the policy practically not implementable. The requirement to convey to public ownership at the Municipality’s discretion should therefore be removed from the Secondary Plan. the Municipality is also not practical or appropriate. Following completion of a development, private roads are owned by condominium corporations. The roads will form part of the common elements of any corporation. The conveyance of such land would result in fundamental changes to the structure of the condominium. Such changes would be governed by the Condominium Act, which could require consent of up to 90% of the owners of units, making the policy practically not implementable. The requirement to convey to public ownership at the Part d) of policy 10.5.3 deleted. Page 170 Municipality’s discretion should therefore be removed from the Secondary Plan. S-5 Mark Jacobs (The Biglieri Group Ltd.) on behalf of Cedardale Realty Holdings Inc. (Norstar Goup) The Draft Schedules of the CTOC Secondary Plan, has a new north-south Special Collector Road, identified as “Street E”, east of Trulls Road between “Street C” and the CTOC Secondary Plan northern boundary. This “Special Collector” will have a proposed right-of-way of 26 metres per Policy 10.4.2 of the Draft CTOC Secondary Plan. “Street E” does not align with any collector or arterial road in the Southeast Courtice (SEC) Secondary Plan. The SEC Secondary Plan went through a multi-year review process where it was determined a north-south collector road was not required given the proximity of Trulls Road to the west. Street E reclassified as a “Key Local Road” north of Street A. S-5 Further, the alignment of “Street E” is adjacent to a woodlot and does not take into account a portion of the woodlot that protrudes to the west along the northern boundary of the CTOC Secondary Plan. This protrusion is identified as a “high constraint” on Figure 7.7 of the Robinson Creek and Tooley Creek Subwatershed Study Phase 2 and 3 Report. Street E realigned at the northern end of the Secondary Plan to avoid the protrusion of the woodlot and to provide for a better future connection to the proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision immediately to the north. S-5 Having Street E terminate at the northern CTOC Area boundary may require future extension through the Subject Site, creating potential implications on the development of the Subject Site. As there is no north-south Collector within or through the Subject S ite in the Southeast Courtice Secondary Plan, the Draft Plan of Subdivision prepared for the Subject Site does not contemplate a Collector Road in this location. Further, following a recent dripline staking with staff from Clarington and CLOCA, it was determined that there is protrusion of the woodlot before it becomes a hedgerow. This will require any north -south road to be aligned further to the west to avoid this natural heritage feature and associated vegetation protection zone. The implications of “Street A” extending north include a reduction in the developable area of the Subject Site as well as costs in terms of upsizing from a local to collector road standard if it’s not identified in the Official Plan as a Collector Road. There are also impacts on the development applications for the Subject Site which are being finalized and will be submitted in the near future. Street E reclassified as a “Key Local Road” north of Street A. In addition, Street E is realigned at the northern end of the Secondary Plan to avoid the protrusion of the woodlot and to provide for a better future connection to the proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision immediately to the north. Page 171 TBG requests that the northern terminus of “Street E” be reconsidered in the Draft CTOC Secondary Plan Schedules. Collector roads should connect to other collector roads and/or arterial roads in order to plan for a cohesive transportation network, which “Street E” does not in its currently proposed alignment. We recommend that “Street E” turn west and connect to Trulls Road where the northern east-west local road is shown. Realigning “Street E” does not preclude the adjacent Key Active Transportation Connection from continuing north along the woodlot and into the Subject Site, which is provided for on the proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision. S-5 A copy of the proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision is included as Appendix B. This Draft Plan updated based on comments from Staff at the Municipality and Region of Durham. There was no request or comment from Staff for a north -south collector road to be provided from the Subject Site to the lands to the south. Acknowledged. S-6 Mustafa Ghassan (Delta Urban Inc.) on behalf of the CTOC Landowner Group Figure 1: Please update to reflect Schedule A. Figure 1 removed from the Secondary Plan. S-6 Section 4.5/ Energy: The LOG remains concerned with the definition of “feasibility” and requests clarification. Please also consider the following revisions: • Please revise “will be required” references to “may be required” • 4.5.3 - Please revise “shall consider” to “shall give consideration” • 4.5.5 – Please remove “and integrate where feasible” Revised policy 4.5.2 to "may be required". S-6 Policy 5.5.4: The LOG requests for “Buildings fronting an Arterial Road shall have a minimum height of 4 -storeys” to be revised to 3 storeys. A minimum of 4-storeys is appropriate along Trulls Road. Page 172 S-6 Policy 5.6.6: The LOG requests for private roads to be permitted in low density areas. Townhomes on a private road is not uncommon. Private roads are consistently prohibited in low density areas throughout Clarington. S-6 Policy 6.4.2: b) The LOG is very concerned with how this policy will be implemented as Engineering Services does not support rear lanes for townhouses. d) The LOG suggests removing this clause. Garages are typically permitted to extend 1 metre or to the depth of a porch. e) Similar comment to (d), this clause does not clarify how much we are permitted to extend. f) Is the minimum of 3m referencing the driveway width or soft landscaping in the front yard? Policy 6.4.2 revised as detailed below: b) Revised to "will be encouraged". d) Revised to: Garages generally shall not extend more than two metres shall be recessed from the front wall of the house. e) Revised by adding: "in accordance with the Zoning By-law" f) Revised by deleting: "with a minimum width of three metres". S-6 Policy 6.4.2 c): Please revise to allow access by rear lane or a municipal right of way. Policy 6.4.2 c) revised: “Parking for traditional townhouses, fourplexes, triplexes, duplexes, semi-detached houses and detached houses that front Courtice Road, Trulls Road, Townline Road, Street B and the east side of Street E, as identified in Schedule C, shall be accessed from another municipal street, Rear Lane or private street. S-6 Policy 11.2.8: The completion of the Master Drainage Plan (MDP) prior to the submission of development applications is not entirely appropriate. Instead, we propose that the policy allows for applications to be submitted once the MDP is sufficiently advanc ed for the respective area. Development applications can be made based on the input from the draft MDP, when available, and suggest that final draft plan approval not be granted until the MDP is completed. Given the scale of the MDP, some areas may require further assessment that may not have an impact on the balance of the Policy 11.2.8 revised: “A Master Drainage Plan for CTOC Secondary Plan area shall be completed to the Municipality’s satisfaction prior to the submission of development applications final draft plan approval for new land uses.” Page 173 site. Allowing for application submissions while continuing to refine the MDP will provide greater flexibility without delaying the development process. S-6 Section 10/ Transportation: We request the inclusion of a policy stating that changes (including elimination) to the road network alignment, including intersections or road extensions, will not require an Official Plan Amendment. For example, the potential non-intersection of Street C at Trulls Road due to a grade separation should not trigger the need for an OPA. This policy would allow for greater flexibility in responding to site -specific conditions and transportation requirements without unnecessarily delaying the development process. The Municipality does not support major changes to the road network without an Official Plan Amendment. The Transportation Impact Study has confirmed the feasibility of Street C intersecting at Trulls Road. S-6 Policy 12.2.9: The LOG requests that the Municipality add the first sentence back into this policy: Inherent to the CTOC Secondary Plan is the principle of flexibility, provided that the general intent and structure of the Secondary Plan are maintained to the satisfaction of the Municipality. As such, It is the intent of the Municipality to permit some flexibility in accordance with Official Plan policy 24.1.5 in the interpretation of the policies, regulations and numerical requirements of this Secondary Plan except those regarding minimum densities and minimum and maximum heights, where this Secondary Plan is intended to be prescriptive. No change proposed as the policy adequately outlines permission for some flexibility in the interpretation of the policies. S-6 Schedule A/ Land Use Plan: We are requesting a minor change in land use designation for the site at the northeast corner of Baseline Rd and Courtice Rd. Specifically, we seek to change the designation from "Mixed Use Transition Area" to "Medium Density Residential". The intent behind this request is to provide flexibility for the owner to adapt to market conditions while still aligning with the broader goals of the Secondary Plan. This adjustment would support more viable development options and contribute to meeting housing demand in the area. Policy 5.4.6 revised to provide opportunity for more street townhouses on blocks that do not have frontage on an Arterial or Collector Road: Street townhouses shall be permitted provided they: a) Do not occupy more than 30% of a block if the block has frontage on an Arterial Road or Collector Road; b) Are a coordinated and contiguous element of a larger high-density development that achieves the minimum Page 174 density in Policy 8.3.9 and supports the urban design objectives of this plan; and c) Do not front or flank an Arterial Road. Schedule A/ Land Use Plan: We appreciate the language used in the Secondary Plan, which allows for the delineation of the Environmental Protection Area boundary to be approximate and further detailed through appropriate studies as part of the development application review process, in alignment with the policies of this Secondary Plan and the Clarington Official Plan. However, we recognize that there may be changes to certain parts of the plan. We kindly request that the schedule(s) be revised to include hatching for a 'Special Study Area' in the identified location, with special emphasis on that area, as it may change to support residential development and accommodate a SWM facility. The Environmental Protection Area boundary has been revised in this area of the Plan. S-6 Schedule A/ Land Use Plan: Request the removal of the Mixed - Use Transition designation on the NW corner of Trulls Rd and Street B. This parcel of land is too small and vehicular access (driveway) will be very difficult. Trulls Road and Street B has the potential to become a "neighbourhood node" where commercial uses serving the surrounding neighbourhoods will be located as well as transit stops. The Mixed-Use Transition Area designation makes it clear that mixed-use development is encouraged and also provides some assurance that the form of development (mid-rise or taller) will relate to development on the other three corners and have a consistent relationship to the adjacent streets. The Mixed-Use Transition Area has been extended to accommodate a mixed-use or apartment building oriented to Trulls Road Policy 5.4.7 revised: "The minimum height shall be 4 storeys, except institutional buildings, which shall have a minimum height of 2 storeys, traditional townhouses as per policy 5.4.6, which Page 175 shall have a minimum height of 3 storeys, and buildings fronting Courtice Road or within 100 metres of the Prominent Intersection on Trulls Road, Arterial Roads which shall have a minimum height of 6 storeys." S-6 Schedule A/ Land Use Plan: We would like to request the relocation of the School Symbol to the south side of the Western Park. This adjustment would allow for a more equitable distribution of community uses across the site and provide the flexibility needed to accommodate future development and site conditions. The school is intentionally located with access from Granville Drive (a Collector road) and will be central to the community north of Street H and west of Trulls Road. S-6 Schedule A/ Land Use Plan: We request the relocation of the Elementary School and Neighbourhood Park, currently located to the north of Townline Rd, west of Courtice Road, to the Metrolinx property south of Townline Rd, as illustrated in the image (blue). This change would support a more equitable distribution of community uses across ownerships and optimize the use of available land. The potential Parkette on the Metrolinx Property could be replaced by this Neighbourhood Park. The Group is deeply concerned with the lack of parkland within the Metrolinx property. As previously discussed, we recommend that the Municipality of Clarington (MOC) either designate parkland within the Metrolinx property to satisfy the parkland obligation for that area or ensure that the parkland obligation for the community does not include the developments within the Metrolinx property. It is unfair for neighbouring lands to bear the burden of fulfilling Metrolinx's parkland obligations, and we believe that this issue needs to be addressed in a manner that equitably distributes the responsibility for community parkland. The school policies provide adequate flexibility with regards to the location and configuration of school blocks. All parks, excluding the Special Park and four Neighbourhood Parks are represented by “P” symbols now. This provides greater flexibility with regards to the location and configuration of Other Neighbourhood Parks and Parkettes. S-6 Schedule A/ Land Use Plan: The LOG requests for a land use designation change to Medium Density (shaded box). Schedule A was revised as requested. S-7 Debra Dom Questioned if Courtice Court was impacted by the Secondary Plan and expressed concern that the document seems confusing to the average person. The Secondary Plan establishes a policy framework to guide growth and development. Existing businesses are not displaced. If, or when, a landowner submits a planning application after the Page 176 Secondary Plan is approved, the policies of the Plan apply. The subject lands are designated General Industrial in the CTOC Secondary Plan. S-8 Mark Jacobs (The Biglieri Group Ltd.) on behalf of Bill Bagg (1447 Prestonvale Road) As per comments on the revised EIS, both SLR and CLOCA have accepted the conclusions regarding the portion of the Subject Site east of Robinson Creek (Appendix 1). It was determined that the Overall Environmental Protection Limit, as shown on Map 4 of the EIS (Appendix 2) is closer to Robinson Creek than identified on the draft CTOC Preferred Land Use Plan. Based on the findings of the EIS and acceptance by SLR and CLOCA, TBG requests that Schedule A of the Draft CTOC Secondary Plan be revised to reflect the Overall Environmental Protection Limit of the Subject Site as delineated by GeoProcess and redesignate a portion as Low Density Residential (Figure 3). These proposed limits are supported by the accepted technical work and represent a balanced approach to environmental protection and development. For updated mapping, a shapefile of the Overall Environmental Protection Limit is enclosed. Schedules revised to modify the limits of the Environmental Protection Area on the subject site in accordance with the revised EIS submission. S-9 Michael Testaguzzo (The Biglieri Group Ltd.) on behalf of Courtice Cigas LP (71 Cigas Road) In summary this letter requests that staff review and refine the Schedules of the draft CTOC SP, apply the Mixed Use Core designation to the Subject Site, and consider flexible policies with respect to the location and size of various plan elements such as Parks, Key Active Transportation Connections and Schools south of the rail corridor. The subject site is designated Mixed Use Core. In addition, and as shown in Schedule A, a new South Core Redevelopment Area has been identified. This area includes the lands located between Trulls Road and Courtice Road, south of the CPKC Rail Corridor and north of Baseline Road. New policies 5.3.14-5.3.15 in the Secondary Plan require that a South Core Implementation Strategy be submitted to the satisfaction of the Municipality prior to development application approval. The Implementation Strategy is intended to be Page 177 prepared through a consultative process between landowners in the area. S-9 The lands located south of the rail corridor exhibits a fine grain parcel fabric, which differs from the larger parcel fabric north of the corridor. Accordingly, TBG believes that refinement is needed to the typical greenfield planning and policy approach for the lands south of the rail corridor as articulated in comments 1 to 3 below. Acknowledged. S-9 On lands south of the corridor, where an existing finer grain lot fabric exists, TBG requests that the Neighbourhood Park (as shown on draft Schedules “A” - “B”) be identified through the use of an icon – similar to other community elements such as Schools and Neighbourhood Parkettes. TBG believes that Neighbourhood Parks are essential in creating complete communities, but their precise location, size and configuration should be kept flexible and subject to refinement through the development review process. Providing icons on the Land Use Schedule allows for flexible implementation while securing for essential community facilities and services. Removing the Neighbourhood Park Land Use Designation south of the rail corridor and using icons instead allows for the precise park locations to be determined through a Block Planning process; which can be undertaken at a more appropriate scale allowing fo r consideration of the existing fine grade lot pattern. The Neighbourhood Park is now shown as a “P” symbol, which provides more flexibility with regards to location and configuration. In addition, the new South Core Redevelopment Area policies outline that the location and configuration of the future elementary school and adjacent neighbourhood park will be confirmed through the South Core Implementation Strategy. S-9 TBG supports equitable distribution of parkland for lands located south of the rail corridor. Provision of Land Use Designations would prematurely influence collaborative Block Planning south of the corridor. Conversely, TBG believes that the use of an ico n in the final Land Use Schedules would encourage better cooperation among landowners, support co-location of parkland dedication between landowners, and in that manner facilitate better phasing of parkland provision with development. It would also ensure that a single landowner does not bare full burden of providing parkland dedication / is not required to provide parkland beyond the requirements of the Planning Act. Lastly, TBG believes appropriate co-location of parkland dedication can incentivize landow ners to move forward with planning applications; thus, supporting the See above. Page 178 orderly, efficient and fair development per Section 2(h) of the Planning Act. Building on above, TBG believe that Section 8 of the CTOC SP should provide policy direction seeking: • equitable distribution of parkland among landowners, as appropriate; • colocation of parkland dedication between adjacent landowners, as appropriate; and, • colocation of parkland dedication with other community elements such as schools and key active transportation connections, as appropriate. Lastly, the use of icons would not in any way reduce the amount of parkland achieved on lands south of the corridor. Icons can and would continue to demonstrate the intended policy direction and vision – being provision of, at a minimum, one Neighbourhood Park and two Parkettes south of the rail corridor. S-9 TBG believes that Section 12 of the CTOC SP (Implementation and Interpretation), should include specific policy directives for lands south of rail corridor. The implementation policies should require preparation of a Block Plan for those lands. With regard s to specific policy direction related to the Block Plan, the following should be considered: • The Block Plan can be prepared by any landowner or group of landowners (to avoid delays in preparation of same); • The Block Plan may propose refinement of parks, schools, and elements of the active transportation network without amendment to the CTOC SP; • The Block Plan should consider the final location of the pedestrian tunnel servicing the proposed GO Station and leverage this infrastructure in location of the Key Active Transportation Connection; • The Block Plan should consider the appropriate location, orientation and size of parks, school blocks, and key active transportation connections; and, Added new policy 5.3.15: “A South Core Implementation Strategy prepared to the Municipality’s satisfaction shall be required prior to the approval of zoning bylaw amendments in the South Core Redevelopment Area. The Implementation Strategy shall be prepared through a consultative process that seeks to engage landowners in the area. The Implementation Strategy shall: a) Confirm the location and configuration of a future elementary school and an adjacent neighbourhood park with a minimum area of one hectare; b) Identify the potential location of parkettes or other publicly accessible open spaces to be included in future plans for individual sites; Page 179 • The Block Plan should consider appropriate distribution of non - residential gross floor area as required in draft policy 5.3.4. c) Confirm the alignment and land requirement for an active transportation connection between a future tunnel under the rail corridor and Baseline Road; d) Include an infrastructure master plan addressing road and servicing improvements and stormwater management facilities required to support the development permitted under this secondary plan; e) Include a phasing plan and consideration of existing uses (land use compatibility); and f) Identify the financial mechanisms, including but not limited to a cost-sharing agreement, and any other tools to be used to ensure the above shared infrastructure and amenities are implemented. S-10 Rosemarie Humphries (Humphries Planning Group Inc.) on behalf of Vetere Holdings and Bell Corp. (1558, 1598 and 1604 Baseline Road) Humphries Planning Group Inc. (HPGI) submitted a letter to provide comments on the draft Courtice TOC Secondary Plan, presented at the Public Meeting on June 19, 2025. HPGI requests that the existing uses on the subject lands be recognized as permitted uses by way of a recognized site -specific exception. Review of the draft document does not adequately provide for such as no site-specific exception has been provided for. Section 12 – Implementation and Interpretation provide recognition of legal existing uses. Section 12.2.7 states: “An existing use of land, building or structure that is lawfully in existence prior to the passage of the implementing Zoning By-law, and which does not conform to this Secondary Plan but continues to be used for such purposes, shall be deemed to be legal non -conforming. Expansions and extensions of legal nonconforming uses will Added new policy 5.8.4: “Notwithstanding policies 5.8.2 and 5.8.3, the existing uses on the properties located at 1598 and a portion of 1604 Baseline Road located south of the rail corridor (Auto Wrecking Yard), as of the date of adoption of this Plan, shall be permitted to continue until the use ceases.” Page 180 require an application to the Committee of Adjustment and may be permitted provided the expansion or extension continues the nonconforming use”. Further to such, Section 12.2.8 states that “Non-conforming uses shall be encouraged to relocate or redevelop so that the subject land may be used in conformity with the policies of this Secondary Plan and the provisions of the implementing Zoning By-law”. The letter outlines concern that the language as proposed respecting the current legal land uses as occurring on the subject lands would now be deemed legal non -conforming. Given the longstanding use of the lands as outlined in previous communications to the Town through its study process we request that a formal recognition of these land uses be established as a site-specific permission in addition to the proposed land used designation in the secondary plan. We further request that these existing land uses be extended as permissions across the entirety of the subject lands. Page 181 Agency Comment Summary Table Agency Details of Submission Staff Response Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing Section 1/ Introduction: Remove reference to the Growth Plan: "In building on Clarington’s Official Plan with area -specific policies, the CTOC Secondary Plan conforms to the Region’s new Official Plan (Envision Durham), the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe and the Provincial Planning Statement." Language revised. Policy 12.2.18: Current language is not aligned with previously used language to describe the Transit Station Charge. The GO Transit Station Funding Act, 2023, grants municipalities the authority to use the transit station charge if they meet legislative requirements, however this authority won’t take effect until the Province introduces a regulation that provides the implementation details.: "In accordance with Provincial legislation and regulations, Council may seek to implement impose a transit station charge against land to pay for costs related to the construction of the GO Transit Station (should the Municipality choose to fund the station)." Language revised. Policy 4.5.1: MEM suggests removing the reference to Hydro One as they are not directly involved with any district energy systems (which are thermal energy and Hydro One deals specifically in electricity transmission and distribution).: "The Municipality shall work with Hydro One and appropriate partners to study the feasibility of a low carbon thermal energy network..." Language revised. Section 3/ Community Structure: MTO has a concern with the following wording: “…In the long term, the green spine may be extended to the Courtice waterfront via a pedestrian/bicycle bridge over Highway 401.” Is the proposed pedestrian/cycle bridge meant to be along existing infrastructure, or is this a new bridge being proposed? Clarington should reach out to MTO to discuss the feasibility of such a bridge as it relates to existing/new infrastructure.: "In the long term, the green spine may be extended to the Courtice waterfront via a pedestrian/bicycle bridge over Highway 401. Clarington may explore the feasibility of a pedestrian/bicycle bridge over Highway 401 to connect the Language revised. Attachment 6 to Report PDS-066-25 Page 182 green spine with the Courtice waterfront, in accordance with MTO requirements.” Policy 5.1.6: MTO has a concern with the following statement: “Ensure office and industrial uses have good access and visibility from major roads and Highway 401.” The municipality should work with the MTO to determine access points that benefit all stakeholders and meet Provincial standards. "Ensure office and industrial uses have good access and visibility from major roads and Highway 401. follow sound access management principles, in accordance with MTO standards and policies." Policy language revised. Policy 5.2.6: MTO suggest a minor text revision to the following statement to reflect current MTO policy wording. "A setback of 14 metres will apply to all future developments that occur adjacent to the Highway 401 and Highway 418 rights-of-way in accordance with Ministry of Transportation policy and will be measured from the highway property line ultimate highway limit." Policy (now 5.2.8) language revised. Section 5.2/ Land Use and Built Form: Development adjacent to rail corridors may be required to take into account the following: • Acoustical Study. • Vibration Study. • Drainage. • Adjacent Development, Crane Swing, Shoring System and Permission to Enter, and Non-Disclosure agreements. • Inclusion of the Metrolinx Noise Warning Clause, and the Registration of an Environmental/Operational Easement. • Setbacks. • Safety barriers. • Metrolinx Work Permit. • Vegetation. • Security fence. Add as a policy somewhere within 5.2 the following text: “That any development within 300m of a Metrolinx Rail Corridor may be subject to the “Metrolinx Adjacent Development Guidelines - GO Transit Heavy Rail Corridors” and “Metrolinx Overbuild Development Guidelines - GO Transit Heavy Rail Corridors." Policy added: “5.2.7 Development within 300 metres of a Metrolinx Rail Corridor may also be subject to the Metrolinx Adjacent Development Guidelines - GO Transit Heavy Rail Corridors and Metrolinx Overbuild Development Guidelines - GO Transit Heavy Rail Corridors.” Page 183 Hydro One Thank you for sending us notification regarding Courtice Transit - Oriented Community Secondary Plan. In our assessment, we confirm there are no existing Hydro One Transmission assets in the subject area. If plans for the undertaking change or the study area expands beyond that shown, please contact Hydro One to assess impacts of existing or future planned electricity infrastructure. Acknowledged. Region of Durham General - As noted multiple times in previous comments, a transportation impact study (TIS) is required to evaluate whether the proposed transportation network is adequate for the planned land uses and to determine safe and appropriate intersection locations and configurations along arterial roads. This study still has not been completed. Until the TIS is completed to our satisfaction, Regional Works will not be able to sign off on the transportation components of the Secondary Plan. The findings of the TIS may result in needs to change the draft Secondary Plan, especially the proposed road network, so the study needs to be completed before the Secondary Plan can be finalized. Acknowledged. The TIS was circulated for review and comment in October 2025 and revisions were made to the Secondary Plan road network to address recommendations from the TIS. Section 10/ Transportation: We are concerned that the Secondary Plan has been fully drafted before the transportation study has been completed. In the absence of any transportation analysis, we cannot conclude whether or not the proposed transportation network and supporting polices are acceptable. Depending on the outcome of the study, more significant changes may be required than are contemplated in this policy. Acknowledged. The TIS circulated for review and comment in October 2025. Section 10.2/ Transportation/ Table 1: We agree with the proposed 45m ROW based on the desire for enhanced streetscape treatments, active transportation facilities, and potential LID features as identified in the draft Secondary Plan and Urban Design and Sustainability Guidelines. The additional ROW width should also simplify utility installations, especially given the need to accommodate a major hydro line, sanitary sewer, and future district energy system. The Regional Official Plan (Table 6 and Map 3e) will need to be updated to incorporate the new ROW width for this section of Courtice Road. Acknowledged. Page 184 Section 10.2/ Transportation/ Table 1: Townline Road Extension and Trulls Road are under the jurisdiction of the Municipality of Clarington, not Durham Region. Revised. Policy 10.2.9: A pedestrian-friendly roundabout is likely not feasible at the Courtice Road/Baseline Road intersection due to the need for multiple lanes to accommodate high traffic volumes on Courtice Roads. An Intersection Control Study will be required to dete rmine whether a roundabout would be feasible/acceptable at this location. Acknowledged. Policy 10.3.2: This policy should reference the need to protect for future grade separation (not just “upgrade”) of the railway crossing on Trulls Road. Grade separation is likely to be required to safely accommodate ultimate active transportation and vehicular t raffic given expected train volumes. As noted in our previous comments, there are technical challenges to implementing a grade separation which could require road realignments and significant additional property. A new “Special Study Area” and associated policy (5.12.1) were added to further protect for the potential future grade separated crossing at Trulls Road: “5.12.1 Schedule A identifies a Special Study Area where engineering analysis will be undertaken as part of the Clarington Transportation Master Plan. This study will evaluate the feasibility of a grade-separated crossing at Trulls Road over the rail corridor, including its potential impacts on adjacent properties and nearby intersections. In the meantime, existing uses in and adjacent to the Special Study Area, including additions and renovations to existing buildings, may continue. New development in the area, however, is prohibited until the study is completed and its recommendations regarding the crossing are approved.” Policy 10.5.2: As noted above, local street intersections with Type A Arterials will generally not be permitted. This should be noted in the policy. Alternatively, the policy could be revised as follows: “Local Roads generally shall not be permitted to intersect with Local road connections to Courtice Road were removed from Schedule C and the policy was revised. Page 185 Arterial Roads, unless Municipal and Regional staff are satisfied such intersections will not cause an undue safety risk to drivers, pedestrians and cyclists and will not unduly compromise arterial road operations.” Schedule A/ Land Use Plan: From the responses to our previous comments, we understand that the secondary school site shown west of Courtice Road and north of Street D is intended to fill the entire block between Farmington Drive and Courtice Road and have access from Farmington Drive. We would still prefer to have the school relocated away from the Type A Arterial. However, if this is not possible then a policy should be added to the Secondary Plan to require the school access to be from Farmington Drive, to help mitigate potential future pressures to allow access from Courtice Road. Added policy: “8.6.9 Secondary schools shall be located on Arterial Roads. In no case will a school have access from Courtice Road.” Schedule A/ Land Use Plan: Please ensure that all proposed mixed use or commercial blocks along Courtice Road (and other arterials) are planned to have access from the rear and to accommodate large enough blocks to allow for appropriate access spacing along Courtice Road and/or away from Courtice Road along intersecting roads. Acknowledged. Schedule C/ Roads and Active Transportation Network: As noted above, the TIS is still in progress, so we cannot determine whether the proposed transportation network is adequate to support the planned land uses, and we have no information to support the proposed intersection locations on the arterial roads. Acknowledged. The TIS was circulated for review and comment in October 2025. Schedule C/ Roads and Active Transportation Network: A total of seven new intersections are shown on Courtice Road between Baseline Road and the north limit of the study area, one Type B/C Arterial (Townline Road extension/Street H), one Collector Road, two “Key Local Roads” and three conceptual Local Roads. Only the Type B/C Arterial intersection has been accepted in principle by the Region. The others will not be permitted without adequate assessment and justification through the TIS. The TIS was circulated for review and comment in October 2025. The number and type of road intersections on Courtice Road were revised. Schedule C/ Roads and Active Transportation Network: Courtice Road is a Type A Arterial. As per the 2024 Regional Official Plan, Table 5, Type A Arterials have traffic movement as their primary Acknowledged. The TIS was circulated for review and comment in October 2025. Page 186 role and are therefore subject to the strictest level of access control, with intersections to be spaced at 700m north -south and other accesses spaced 200m from adjacent intersections and accesses. In addition, Type A Arterials are intended to connect with Freeways, other Arterials, and Collector Roads, not with Local Roads. Proposed deviations from these standards need to be backed up with sufficient assessment and analysis to demonstrate that they will not unduly compromise the safety and operations of the Type A Arterial and to demonstrate a significant need for the proposed deviations. To date, we have not received any such assessment or analysis. Schedule C/ Roads and Active Transportation Network: We recognize that it may not be feasible to comply with the 700m intersection spacing standard along Courtice Road given the nature of the proposed development, but the proposed intersection locations need to be assessed/analyzed to demonstrate: safe decision and intersection sight distances; adequate spacing to accommodate required auxiliary lanes that conform to Regional design standards; and acceptable traffic operations, including signal coordination. Acknowledged. The TIS was circulated for review and comment in October 2025. Schedule C/ Roads and Active Transportation Network: All conceptual Local Road connections to Courtice Road are to be removed from the Schedule. In accordance with the Regional Official Plan, these connections will not be permitted. Development in these areas needs to be planned with access from the rear. Local road connections to Courtice Road were deleted in Schedule C and Street D was reclassified as a collector. Schedule C/ Roads and Active Transportation Network: Note that no Local Road or private accesses to Courtice Road will be permitted between Baseline Road and the Type B/C Arterial to the north (Townline Road extension/Street H) due to significant grades and sight distance restrictions related to the bridge over the CPKC Rail corridor. Local road connections to Courtice Road were deleted in Schedule C and Street D was reclassified as a collector. Schedule C/ Roads and Active Transportation Network: We do not agree with the proposed “Key Local Road” connections to Courtice Road (Street D and Street F). In addition to spacing issues, as noted above Local Roads, including “Key Local Roads”, should not connect with a Type A Arterial. If these roads are intended to Local road connections to Courtice Road were deleted in Schedule C and Street D was reclassified as a collector. Street F will be necessary to provide access to the pocket of planned development east of Page 187 function as collector roads, they should be classified as such, consistent with their role of conveying significant traffic volumes between the surrounding Local Road network and the Type A Arterial. If they are not expected to carry significant enough traffic volumes to warrant classification as collector roads, then they should be realigned to connect with Collectors that in turn connect with Courtice Road. Courtice Road. It should align with the planned east-west collector in the Southeast Courtice Secondary Plan. The distance from Bloor Street should facilitate full turning movements, although it may be restricted to right-ins/right-outs. Schedule C/ Roads and Active Transportation Network: With the addition of lands to the northeast of the PMTSA boundary to the CTOC Secondary Plan area, the north end of Street F is now shown to connect with Courtice Road. It is not clear how this would align with the previously approved east -west Collector Road at the south end of the Southeast Courtice Secondary Plan. The Southeast Courtice Collector Road was approved as a “T” intersection with no east leg as lands to the east were outside the urban boundary at the time. There may not be enough space between the collector and Bloor Street to accommodate proper back-to-back left turn lanes for the intersections at Bloor Street and Street F. Street F will be necessary to provide access to the pocket of planned development east of Courtice Road. It should align with the planned east-west collector in the Southeast Courtice Secondary Plan. The distance from Bloor Street should facilitate full turning movements, although it may be restricted to right-ins/right-outs. Schedule C/ Roads and Active Transportation Network: The “Key Active Transportation Connection” shown crossing Courtice Road at Street D may need to be reconsidered if the Street D intersection cannot be accommodated and/or signalized at the proposed location. Street D was reclassified as a collector and is proposed to be signalized. Schedule C/ Roads and Active Transportation Network: As noted in our previous comments, realignment of Trulls Road and/or Baseline Road may be required to accommodate the future grade separation of Trulls Road from the CPKC Rail corridor. If the needs for these realignments cannot be assessed before the Secon dary Plan is finalized, then a policy and a note on Schedule A should be added to require assessment of the grade separation needs prior to development in the surrounding area. A new “Special Study Area” and associated policy (5.12.1) were added to further protect for the potential future grade separated crossing at Trulls Road: ““5.12.1 Schedule A identifies a Special Study Area where engineering analysis will be undertaken as part of the Clarington Transportation Master Plan. This study will evaluate the feasibility of a grade-separated crossing at Trulls Road over the rail corridor, including its Page 188 potential impacts on adjacent properties and nearby intersections. In the meantime, existing uses in and adjacent to the Special Study Area, including additions and renovations to existing buildings, may continue. New development in the area, however, is prohibited until the study is completed and its recommendations regarding the crossing are approved.” Schedule C/ Roads and Active Transportation Network: Symbols for existing and future railway grade separations should be added to the legend. Revised. Schedule C/ Roads and Active Transportation Network: A proposed east-west trail is shown crossing Courtice Road at a mid -block location between Street B and Street D where it will not be feasible to provide a protected (i.e., signalized) pedestrian crossin g. A grade- separated crossing for this trail should be provided, or it should be re- routed to cross Courtice Road at a signalized intersection. The same considerations would apply to other proposed trails with mid-block crossings of arterial roads under Clarington’s jurisdiction. Added policy: “10.7.4 Trails shall cross Courtice Road only where there are controlled intersections. Where trails intersect with Street H away from controlled intersections, crossings shall be accommodated in underpasses where feasible and appropriate based on grades and environmental features or with signalized crossings at street-level.” It appears that the minimum and target gross density for the CTOC Protected Major Transit Station Area may be inadvertently overestimated. It looks to have been calculated using the gross developable area (net of environmental protection areas and rail corridor), as opposed to the entirety of the PMTSA area. The minimum gross density works out to approximately 125 people and jobs per hectare if calculated over the entirety of the PMTSA boundary. Following discussions with the Region, the land budget has been slightly updated; however, the gross density calculation still excludes Environmental Protection Area (EPA) and rail corridor lands. A significant portion of EPA is located at the north and southeast corners of the PMTSA. When EPA lands are included in the calculation, minimum density targets appear artificially high, which in turn Page 189 necessitates changes to built form permissions. Staff consider it appropriate to exclude EPA lands because the Clarington Official Plan defines Gross Developable Area as: “the area of the site or lot less the area designated Environmental Protection, and major infrastructure that is built or approved under the Environmental Assessment Act (Provincial 400 series highway rights of way, hydro corridors, and hydro generation stations).” It appears that the land budget is underestimating the dwelling unit yield of designations within the PMTSA by assuming takeouts that may be higher than necessary. As discussed previously, recent higher-density subdivision application statistics have shown that lower takeouts may be supported, which could significantly increase the capacity of these areas and help to reach the minimum transit supportive density target of 150 people and jobs per hectare. Staff would be happy to discuss these comments further if desired. See staff response above. Staff appreciate the inclusion of minimum density and built form requirements which support higher residential densities within the PMTSA, while also protecting space for non -residential uses which will support the development of the PMTSA as a complete community. Acknowledged. Schedule A/ Land Use Plan and Schedule C/ Roads and Active Transportation Network: Consideration should be given for an east to west active transportation connection from the Courtice GO Station site (perhaps “Street H” (i.e. Townline Road). As an arterial, "Street H" will be designed in accordance with Table C-2 of the Official Plan and may have a Multi-Use Path to provide an active transportation connection. Section1/ Introduction: The CTOC Secondary Plan should mention the Regional Transit Oriented Development Strategy which was developed to support Transit Oriented Development in key areas of Language revised. Page 190 major transit across the region, including the Courtice GO Station, and highlights important planning concepts to consider in the coordination and planning of GO Station Areas. It is requested that the update read as follows: "In building on Clarington’s Official Plan with area -specific policies, the CTOC Secondary Plan conforms to the Region’s new Official Plan (Envision Durham), the Regional Transit Oriented Development Strategy, the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe and the Provincial Planning Statement." Policies 5.3.11 - 5.3.13: policies will need to be reviewed in consideration of Station Design work as it progresses. These policies and how they apply to station design should be considered at all design stages. Acknowledged. Policy 12.2.18: the Region is currently exploring funding opportunities for the new stations along the GO Lakeshore East Extension to Bowmanville through the GO Transit Station Funding Act, 2023. As such, it is suggested that the bracketed sentence, “should the Municipality choose to fund the station” be removed, to avoid confusion. The success and viability of the densities proposed in CTOC is centered around the future Courtice GO Station, therefore station delivery is critical. Policy revised. Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority Policy 11.3.2: The Municipality altered the policy to state “Such facilities shall not be located within natural heritage features but may be permitted within the vegetated protection zone provided that the intent of the vegetation protection zone is maint ained and it is supported by an Environmental Impact Study.” Staff note that the intended function of the VPZ is to provide a buffer to the natural hazard/feature that is to be protected. This policy should be qualified to note this as the primary function of the VPZ. The amended wording indicates that the entire VPZ could be utilized for stormwater management facilities such as underground storage tanks, directly abutting the feature, thereby impacting its future protection. CLOCA staff recommends that add itional wording be included that restricts the infrastructure to ‘minor encroachments’ for the purposes of fine grading, which can be restored. CLOCA also recommends this notes that ‘naturalized’ facilities be Added policy: “11.3.5 Low impact development features shall not be located within natural heritage features but may be permitted within the outer 5 metres of the vegetation protection zone provided the intent of the vegetation protection zone is maintained and it is supported by an Environmental Impact Study. Page 191 considered, and not underground chambers that may require full excavation in the future. Policy 11.3.6: CLOCA notes that flood control facilities were identified as potentially required as part of the Robinson Tooley Subwatershed Study. As such, CLOCA staff strongly recommend that “Stormwater management facilities required for flood control are to be designed according to the standards and guidelines of the Conservation Authority and the Municipality of Clarington” be added. This is addressed in Policy 11.2.8, which includes the following language: Regulatory Storm control may be required and must be designed to the satisfaction of the Conservation Authority and the Municipality of Clarington. CLOCA Planning staff suggest the Municipality consider a connection between the North Neighbourhood Park and the east - west tributary as an environmental linkage opportunity. This would be consistent with the objectives of Policy 4.1.2 and 4.1.3 by providing a continuous connection from the wetland to the main branch of the Tooley Creek for both wildlife passage as well as provide opportunities to integrate passive recreational trails into the community design. There will be further opportunities at time of development to explore a connection between the North Neighbourhood Park and east-west tributary. CLOCA staff acknowledge the inclusion of the Master Drainage Plan for the CTOC lands to the satisfaction of Clarington and CLOCA. Acknowledged. CLOCA staff acknowledge the replacement of unauthorized removals at a rate of 3:1. Acknowledged. CLOCA staff support the policy whereas the refinement of the Environmental Protection designation may occur without the need of an Official Plan Amendment, subject to being supported by the appropriate site specific studies. In instances where the EP designation is a result of natural hazards, the change will be required to be at the satisfaction of CLOCA. Acknowledged. The Environmental Protection Policies should address the Municipality’s position with respect to potential development encroachments within the VPZ of an EP zone, such as LIDs, grading, retaining walls, etc. New policy 11.3.5 added as outlined above to provide additional clarity. Section 8.2/ Parks and Community Facilities: CLOCA staff recommend that Clarington staff provide a general position with respect to the acceptability of privately owned park spaces, or Policy 8.5.4 details that privately owned urban parks and squares may count toward parkland dedication where it is unencumbered by underground parking Page 192 parks with infrastructure such as parking garages below, and if these parks will be provided parkland dedication credits. CLOCA staff support Policy 11 with respect to servicing, specifically as they relate to Stormwater Management Polices. CLOCA suggests the Municipality address the issue of privately owned storage tanks, or if the Municipality would be willing to accept the infrastructure. All region controls will be required to be assumed by the Municipality. Acknowledged. Kawartha Pine Ridge (KPR) District School Board and Peterborough Victora Northumberland and Clarington (PVNC) Catholic District School Board Schedule A/ Land Use Plan: Schedule A identifies six (6) elementary school sites and two (2) secondary school sites. Several of the school sites are situated adjacent to or in proximity to neighbourhood parks or parkettes. Given the information provided on the draft Land Budget, KPR anticipates that the plan area will generate approximately 1,800 elementary students and 600 secondary students. Similarly, PVNC anticipates 500 elementary students and 300 secondary students to be generated from the secondary plan. Further, the Boards anticipate that students will be generated outside of the CTOC area, that would attend schools within the CTOC area, namely the area south of Highway 401. Based on these numbers, KPR and PVNC are satisfied that the number of elemen tary and secondary schools identified on draft Schedule A is sufficient to meet future student needs. Please note that without clear information about the future population of the secondary plan area, this is the best information we can provide about school site requirements. Site needs may be adjusted as the plan details are refined. Acknowledged. Section 8/ Parks and Community Facilities: KPR and PVNC support these objectives: • parks, elementary schools and basic commercial amenities are to be situated within a 10- minute walk for most residents, • timely delivery of elementary schools and indoor recreation facilities within the community. Acknowledged. Section 8/ Parks and Community Facilities: This section indicates that parks and school sites should incorporate low-impact development features for stormwater management. Acknowledged. Page 193 It should be noted that while KPR and PVNC support this objective, funding for the construction and associated site works is provided by the Ministry of Education through the Capital Priorities Program. The funding is based on square footage formulation, which does not consider costs associated with low-impact development. While the Boards would endeavor to utilize low - impact development features, it may not always be financially feasible to do so. Section 8.6/ Schools: KPR and PVNC suggest that child care centres be included in this section as new school builds and school additions typically include child care centres, as Ministry of Education capital funding for new school builds and additions include funding for child care spaces. Policy 8.6.4 revised: “The size and configuration of each school site shall be to the satisfaction of the School Board and the Municipality. If a school site includes a child care centre, the site shall be appropriately sized and configured to address the needs of the school and the child care centre.” Policy 8.6.1: indicates that, “approximately six (6) elementary schools and two (2) secondary schools are planned in CTOC”. Further it is identified that the general locations for the potential schools are identified on Schedules A and B, however, that they may be located elsewhere, and additional school sites added, without amendment to the Plan. KPR and PVNC support Section 8.6.1. Acknowledged. Policy 8.6.2: indicates that if an alternative site is selected for a school, or a school site not be required, the lands identified for the preferred site shall be developed in accordance with the policies for the underlying land use designation. This section also notes that locations and configurations for schools will be determined through the review of development applications, in coordination with the school boards. KPR and PVNC support Section 8.6.2. Acknowledged. Policy 8.6.3: states that elementary school sites, where possible, shall abut a park or other usable green space to provide areas of shared amenity. KPR and PVNC support Section 8.6.3. Acknowledged. Policy 8.6.4: indicates that the size and configuration of each school site shall be to the satisfaction of the School Board and the Municipality. Policy 8.6.4 revised: “The size and configuration of each school site shall be to the satisfaction of the School Board Page 194 KPR and PVNC supports Section 8.6.4. However, if child care centres are to be considered as part of Section 8, the Boards suggest that wording be included to indicate that school sites must be appropriately sized and configured to address the needs of the school(s) and child care centre(s). and the Municipality. If a school site includes a child care centre, the site shall be appropriately sized and configured to address the needs of the school and the child care centre.” Policy 8.6.5: indicates that the sharing of sites by two elementary schools or a school and another community facility shall be strongly encouraged. KPR and PVNC supports Section 8.6.5. However, we would suggest that child care centres be similar to Section 8.6.4, the Boards suggest that wording be included to indicate that school sites must be appropriately sized and configured to address the needs of the school(s) and community facility. Policy 8.6.5 revised: “The sharing of sites by two elementary schools or a school and another community facility, such as a child care centre, shall be strongly encouraged.” Policy 8.6.6: indicates that shared parking between a school and an adjacent or nearby municipal facility or other institutional use shall be strongly encouraged. KPR and PVNC support Section 8.6.6. Acknowledged. Policy 8.6.7: indicates that schools being constructed within the designated Mixed Use Core and Mixed Use Transition areas are strongly encouraged to be located within the podium of larger mixed-use buildings or take a compact, multi-storey form to optimize their sites. It is further noted that such schools shall provide their own outdoor play space on -site, which may be located at-grade or on a rooftop. KPR and PVNC support Section 8.6.7, however, the Boards are concerned that the wording of the final sect ion precludes the Boards from utilizing shared outdoor play space. Podium or vertical schools often times share green space with other schools, community facilities, and/or municipalities to reduce school site size requirements. The Boards recommend that the final sentence be reworded so it is understood that shared outdoor play space between Boards, community facilities, municipalities, etc. is supported. Policy 8.6.7 revised: “Schools required within the designated Mixed Use Core and Mixed Use Transition areas are strongly encouraged to be located within the podium of larger mixed-use buildings or take a compact, multi-storey form to optimize their sites. Such schools shall provide their own outdoor play space on- site, which may be located at-grade or on a rooftop and shared between the school and an adjacent or nearby municipal facility or other institutional use. Policy 8.6.8: indicates that elementary schools are to be located on Collector Roads or at the intersection of Collector Roads and Local Roads with a minimum right-of-way width of 20 metres. Road Acknowledged. Page 195 connections should facilitate easy and safe movement of school buses and avoid the need for students to cross major roads. KPR and PVNC support Section 8.6.8. Policy 8.6.9: indicates that schools sites should be designed to encourage walking and cycling and should be connected to the larger active transportation network of sidewalks, bike lanes and multi-use paths. KPR and PVNC support Section 8.6.9. Acknowledged. Page 196 FINAL REPORT PREPARED BY HEMSON FOR THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON COURTICE TRANSIT-ORIENTED COMMUNITY SECONDARY PLAN FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS November 25, 2025 1000 - 30 St. Patrick Street, Toronto ON M5T 3A3 416 593 5090 | hemson@hemson.com | www.hemson.com Attachment 7 to Report PDS-066-25 Page 197 CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND 1 A. Growth Forecasts for Build-Out of CTOC 1 B. Key Data and Assumptions 5 2. CAPITAL COST ANALYSIS 7 A. Developer Funded Capital (Local Service Capital) 8 B. DC-Funded Capital 8 3. OPERATING COST ANALYSIS 11 4. REVENUE ANALYSIS 14 A. Assessment 14 B. Municipal Property Tax Revenue 14 C. Development Charge Revenue 15 5. SUMMARY OF FISCAL IMPACT 18 Page 198 Introduction and Background | 1 1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND As part of the Courtice Transit-Oriented Community (CTOC) Secondary Plan presented by the Municipality of Clarington, Hemson Consulting Ltd. has been retained to complete a fiscal impact analysis. This report summarizes Hemson’s evaluation of the capital costs, operating costs, and revenue sources associated with the draft secondary plan as it relates to the Major Transit Station Area (MTSA) and the surrounding area. A. GROWTH FORECASTS FOR BUILD-OUT OF CTOC The total area of the CTOC Secondary Plan Area (CTOC Area) is 398.7-hectares, of which 275.5 hectares are developable (See Figure 1 and Figure 2). Centred around the future Courtice GO Station, the Major Transit Station Area (MTSA) is the primary focus area for major development, comprising of 131 hectares of gross developable land in the CTOC Area with a target gross density of 158 people and jobs per hectare. The surrounding Secondary Plan Area, comprised of an additional 144.5 hectares of gross developable land, is primarily intended to support development of both low-density residential units and industrial areas, with a comparatively lower target gross density of 134 people and jobs per hectare. Across both sections of the CTOC Area, a minimum of 11,876 residential units and 6,942 jobs is estimated at full build-out. For the purpose of the fiscal impact analysis, the minimum projections of residential units, population, and employment are used throughout in forecast of costs and revenues associated with the CTOC Area build-out; see Table 2 for a summary of the forecast used in the fiscal impact analysis. Page 199 Introduction and Background | 2 Figure 1. Map of CTOC Area Source: Municipality of Clarington Page 200 Introduction and Background | 3 Figure 2. CTOC Area Land Use Plan Source: Municipality of Clarington Page 201 Introduction and Background | 4 Densities across the CTOC Area are expected to range as follows, based on minimum projections of units, population, and jobs: • Residential unit densities: from 25 units per gross hectare for low-density residential to 325 units per gross hectare for mixed-use residential within the Major Transit Station Area. • Population and employment densities: from 45 persons and jobs per gross hectare for Low Density Residential development to 334 persons and jobs per gross hectare for Mixed-Use Core Development within the Major Transit Station Area. Additionally, the plan anticipates the CTOC Area accommodating a minimum of approximately 8,162 new jobs at build-out. As shown in Table 1, the residential development is anticipated to accommodate approximately 8,200 workers at build-out across the CTOC Area. The new jobs within the CTOC Area are projected to generate approximately 455,900square metres of new non- residential floor space, based on an estimated floor space per worker of 56 square metres. Table 1: Summary of CTOC Area Growth to Build Out (Target)1 Land Use Residentia l Units Population Jobs People + Jobs Non-Res. Floor Space (sq.m.)2 MTSA Area Mixed Use Core 11,772 16,787 3,357 20,144 187,529 Core Transition Area 2,097 4,194 419 4,613 23,426 Residential 851 2,186 109 2,295 6,104 District - - 1,584 1,584 88,475 Outside MTSA Area Residential 674 1,732 87 1,818 4,836 Residential 807 2,527 126 2,653 7,057 Total 16,830 28,685 8,162 36,848 455,922 1 Forecast provided by Municipality of Clarington 2 At 56m2 per worker. Page 202 Introduction and Background | 5 Table 2, provides a summary of the “projected minimum” development: 11,876 residential units, accommodating a population of 20,083 and 6,942 jobs in 387,752 sq.m of non- residential space. The projected minimum amounts have been used for the purpose of the fiscal impact analysis to determine the low-end of the fiscal impact, higher levels of development will generally produce a higher level of positive (or less negative) fiscal impacts. Table 2: Summary of CTOC Area Growth to Build Out (Projected Minimum)3 Land Use Residential Units Population Jobs People + Jobs Floor Space (sq.m.)4 MTSA Area Mixed Use Core 8,502 12,124 2,425 14,549 135,437 Core Transition Area 1,398 2,796 280 3,076 15,617 Residential 547 1,405 70 1,475 3,924 District - - 1,584 1,584 88,475 Outside MTSA Area Residential 433 11,113 56 1,169 3,109 Residential 576 1,805 90 1,895 5,041 Total 11,876 20,083 6,942 27,025 387,752 3 Forecast provided by Municipality of Clarington 4 At 56m2 per worker. B. KEY DATA AND ASSUMPTIONS The results of the analysis are high-level in nature and are intended to illustrate the potential fiscal impact of new development on municipal budgets at full build-out of the CTOC Area, based on the projected minimums development. Actual impacts will be influenced by several factors, including the cost and timing of infrastructure projects and the rate of development. Page 203 Introduction and Background | 6 The analysis is based on the following key inputs: Municipality of Clarington Financial Data: actual expenditures and non-tax revenues for 2024, as reported in the Financial Information Returns (FIRs) and municipal budget documents, were used to establish current municipal expenditures per capita and employment; Current value assessments (CVAs): derived from the current assessment roll to estimate future property tax revenues, using data from recently constructed (last ten years) units and buildings; and Development assumptions: derived from the CTOC Draft Preferred Land Use Plan to estimate future total and per unit costs and revenues. Minimum projected amounts for residential units, population, and jobs are used exclusively. Unless otherwise stated, all values are expressed in constant 2025 dollars. This report is organized as follows: Section 2 provides the analysis of the capital costs associated with the anticipated servicing needs of the CTOC Area to build-out. Developer-funded, DC-funded, and Municipality-funded costs are examined, as well as the long-term lifecycle costs associated with the new infrastructure. Section 3 examines the additional annual operating costs arising from the new infrastructure, as well as the associated population and employment growth in the CTOC Area. Section 4 provides a forecast of the assessment growth and Municipality property tax revenue potential of the CTOC Area at full build-out and compares this potential with Municipality-wide averages. Section 5 summarizes the long-term annual tax-supported costs and revenues associated with the CTOC Area and provides concluding observations on the fiscal impact analysis. Page 204 Capital Cost Analysis | 7 2. CAPITAL COST ANALYSIS The fiscal impact analysis examines growth-related capital costs to be funded through direct developer contributions and development charges (DCs); no non-growth shares of the project to be funded by the Municipality have been identified. The potential long-term lifecycle costs associated with the new infrastructure is also examined. Given that the Courtice Transit-Oriented Community Secondary Plan is a greenfield development, and therefore will require net new infrastructure during the build-out, no existing infrastructure is being replaced, and upsized for development, therefore none of the capital costs are allocated as replacement shares; all costs are fully development-related. Anticipated capital costs to support growth within the CTOC Area are summarized in Table 3 and total $251.0 million to full build-out of the area.These capital costs will be paid for through a combination of development charges and local services, without the need of property tax funding. Table 3: Capital Cost Summary Asset Type Gross Cost Average Annual Cost Source Stormwater $20,500,000 $199,051 Hemson DCBS Transportation Services $108,161,001 $2,190,254 Secondary Plan Infrastructure Details Recreation & Parks $21,563,883 $895,128 Draft CTOC Secondary Plan Library Services $10,482,390 $409,620 Hemson DCBS + Capital Provision Public Works $9,146,937 $448,406 Hemson DCBS + Capital Provision Protection $13,189,361 $747,883 Hemson DCBS + Capital Provision Indoor Recreation $67,941,319 $1,375,745 Hemson DCBS + Capital Provision Note: DC Study costs have been indexed to current $. Page 205 Capital Cost Analysis | 8 A. DEVELOPER FUNDED CAPITAL (LOCAL SERVICE CAPITAL) This analysis estimates the amount of additional funding for the future lifecycle replacement capital cost (or state of good repair costs) required as a result of the installation of local services capital by developers. Local services capital typically includes local roads, streetlights, and sidewalks, as well as any water, sanitary, and storm sewer infrastructure that is internal to a development. For the purposes of this analysis, any sanitary sewers, storm sewers and associated infrastructure along local roads are considered to be local services capital. In addition, parkland improvements provided by developers through section 42 of the Planning Act is considered to be local services capital. To estimate the Municipality’s incremental increase in capital replacement contributions, useful life assumptions were applied. Assumptions for long-term inflation (2.0%) and borrowing (3.5%) were also used. This information was used to estimate an annual replacement contribution that would be required by the end of each asset’s useful life. As shown in Table 4, the anticipated replacement costs are estimated at approximately $1.5 million per year, which translates to $55.12 per capita and employment when allocated across the CTOC development forecast. Table 4: Summary of Replacement Costs and Annual Tax-Supported Replacement Contribution for Local Services Capital Asset Type Replacement Cost Useful Life Annual Provision Per Capita + Employment Stormwater $124,270,914 90 years $199,051 $7.36 Services $168,383,988 50 years $1,241,927 $45.95 Parks $1,957,899 25 years $48,567 $1.76 B. DC-FUNDED CAPITAL For the purposes of this analysis, DC-eligible capital costs include collector and arterial roads and related infrastructure to be developed in the CTOC Area. DC-eligible general services capital costs have also been estimated based on service levels set out in the Municipality’s 2025 DC Background Study. DC-Eligible Costs and Projected DC Revenues Page 206 Capital Cost Analysis | 9 Table 5 compares the total anticipated DC-eligible costs with anticipated revenues associated with the build-out of the CTOC Area under the current (2025) DC rates imposed by the Municipality. Overall, DC revenues exceed DC costs by $103.7 million to full build-out under the current DC by-laws. This notional DC revenue “surplus” is primarily associated with the Municipal Road infrastructure. As Roads and Related Infrastructure account for 56% of current Municipal DC rates, it is the primary source of revenue from DCs in the CTOC Area during it’s build- out. It is important to stress that development of the subject lands will generate additional road activity which will necessitate improvements to roads across the municipality, these needs are reflected in Clarington’s DC Background Study. The difference may also be due to the categorization of costs as local vs. DC-eligible services in the analysis (it is noted that municipalities are granted some flexibility in the determination of local services). The development-related infrastructure needs for general services are based on the level of service standards and capital program costs set out in the respective DC Background Studies. DC revenue calculations incorporate the inability of the Municipality to impose DCs for social housing and public health as of November 28, 2022. The calculations also do not account for DC revenue losses arising from other Bill 23, the More Homes Built Faster Act changes: rental housing discounts, exemptions for affordable housing, attainable housing, non-profit housing, and inclusionary zoning, changes to historical service level calculations, fixed interest rates on frozen DCs, and potential ineligibility of certain capital costs (e.g. land acquisition). Any such revenue loss is assumed to be minor or indeterminable for the CTOC Area at the present time. Page 207 Capital Cost Analysis | 10 Table 5. DC-Eligible Costs and Revenues Under Current (2025) DC Rates Asset Type Total Cost Under Current Rates Difference Transportation Services $46,828,308 $195,335,934 ($148,507,626) Recreation & Parks $88,335,202 $58,039,377 $30,295,825 Services $10,482,390 $7,606,764 $2,875,626 $9,146,937 $2,940,440 $6,206,497 Government $0 $2,940,440 ($2,940,440) Protection $13,189,361 $4,837,260 $8,352,101 i. Lifecycle Costs Once again, useful life assumptions were used to estimate the Municipal long-term incremental increase in capital replacement contributions associated with the new DC- funded infrastructure. As shown in Table 6, at full build-out these replacement costs are estimated at approximately $4.8 million per year, which translates to $176.74 per capita and employment when allocated across the CTOC Area development forecast. Table 6. Summary of Replacement Costs and Annual Tax-Supported Replacement Contribution for DC-Funded Capital Asset Type Replacement Cost Useful Life Annual Provision Per Capita + Employment Services $128,563,364 Municipality Recreation & Parks $34,127,493 Municipality Indoor Recreation $186,527,442 Municipality Library Services Municipality Public Works Municipality Fire Protection Total $419,469,828 $4,776,442 $176.74 Page 208 Operating Cost Analysis | 11 3. OPERATING COST ANALYSIS Tax-supported operating costs arising from the construction of new developer- and DC- funded capital, and the addition of households, people and jobs in the CTOC, were estimated based on data from the Municipality and Region’s 2024 Financial Information Returns (FIR) and the provided CTOC Draft Preferred Land Use Plan and projected development minimums. Utility-supported Water and Wastewater services are not included in this analysis. Table 7 summarizes the gross operating costs anticipated to be associated with development in the CTOC Area. Cost drivers were applied to FIR operating cost data. Where appropriate, costs are driven by the planned infrastructure investments (e.g. Roads and Related, Parks), whereas many services are considered to be driven by population growth, population and employment growth, or household growth. For all services, incremental cost savings are common and factors of 75% and 80% were applied accordingly. The total additional annual operating cost associated with development of the CTOC Area is calculated at $22.7 million. Table 8 summarizes the anticipated non-tax revenues and resulting net operating costs. These non-tax revenues include grants, user fees, and service charges as per the FIR. It is assumed that these revenues will remain consistent on a per-capita basis. Annual non-tax revenues associated with the CTOC Area at build-out are calculated at approximately $3.3 million. The total net annual operating cost associated with the CTOC is approximately $19.4 million. This translates to about $717.32 per capita and employee in the CTOC Area. Page 209 Operating Cost Analysis | 12 Table 7. Anticipated Additional Operating Costs Based on 2024 Financial Information Return Service Cost / Unit Unit of Measure Quantity Operating Cost $55.38 Pop + Emp (75%) 27,025 $1,496,565 $428.56 Households (80%) 11,876 $5,089,560 and Control $12.11 Pop + Emp (80%) 27,025 Building Permit and Inspection Services $62.71 Households (80%) 11,876 Emergency Measures Roads and Related Parking Storm - Urban Storm - Rural Erosion Control & Region Services $6.55 Households (80%) 11,876 Cemeteries Social Services Parks Recreation Libraries Museums & Cultural Services $7.68 Population (75%) 20,083 Planning and Development $46.52 Pop + Emp (75%) 27,025 Total $22,671,663 Notes: Unit costs based on 2024 FIR operating expenditures, Census estimates of population (109,379), Households (38,265), and Draft 2025 DC Background Study estimate of employment (33,376) Page 210 Operating Cost Analysis | 13 Table 8. Anticipated Grant, User Fees, and Service Charges and Resulting Net Operating Costs Service Non-Tax Revenues Per Unit Unit of Measure Total Non- Tax Revenues Net Operating Costs Per Pop + Emp $5.26 Pop + Emp (75%) $142,274 $1,354,291 $50.11 $11.38 Households (80%) $135,118 $4,954,442 $183.33 and Control $0.45 Pop + Emp (80%) $12,054 $315,153 $11.66 Building Permit and Inspection Services $0.15 Households (80%) $1,745 $743,052 $27.49 Emergency Measures Roads and Related Parking Storm - Urban Storm - Rural Erosion Control & Region services $0 Households (80%) $0 $77,767 $2.88 Cemeteries Social Services Parks Recreation Libraries Museums & Cultural Services $1.59 Population (75%) $31,885 $848,593 $4.52 Planning and Development $21.48 Pop + Emp (75%) $580,532 $122,277 $25.04 Total $3,285,875 $19,385,788 $717.32 Page 211 Revenue Analysis | 14 4. REVENUE ANALYSIS This section describes the analysis of the future assessment, property tax revenues, and development charge revenues in the CTOC Area. A. ASSESSMENT The major source of new revenue generated by new development in the CTOC Area will be property taxes. To estimate future property taxes forecasts of new residential and non- residential assessment were prepared. Assessed values for residential units were determined with reference to the current value assessment (CVA) of homes constructed in Clarington between 2014 - 2024 that are of similar quality and size to those that are likely to be constructed in CTOC Area. Three categories of CVAs are used to calculate tax revenues: Low Density (Corresponding to all Low Density Residential units within the CTOC Area), Medium Density (Corresponding to all Medium Density Residential units in the CTOC Area), and High Density (Corresponding to all Mixed Use Core and Core Transition Area units in the CTOC Area). Similarly, the non-residential assessment forecasts were based on values per square metre of gross floor area of recently constructed buildings in Clarington. The CVAs used in the analysis are as follows: Low Density Residential Units $500,000 per unit Medium Density Residential Units $375,000 per unit High Density Residential Units $250,000 per unit Local Non-Residential Buildings $3,200 per sq.m. B. MUNICIPAL PROPERTY TAX REVENUE The property tax revenue forecasts at build out of the CTOC were developed by applying the current (2025) Municipal tax rates for the applicable land classes to the projected assessments. The projected total of non-residential floor area in the CTOC Area is estimated based on an assumed space requirement of 56 square metres per worker. Based on the minimum projection of 6,942 new jobs within the CTOC Area, total non-residential floor area is estimated at 388,754 square metres at full build-out. Page 212 Revenue Analysis | 15 As shown in Table 9, the total CVA of new buildings within the CTOC Area is forecast at approximately $4.5 billion, including $2.6 billion in High Density Residential CVA. After applying the Municipality’s 2025 tax rates to each property class, total annual Municipal property tax revenue is calculated at $23.5 million, or an average of $868.85 per person or employment in the area. Table 9. Summary of Annual Municipal Tax Revenues at Build Out Land Use Forecast Assessment (2025) Total Assessment Municipality Tax Rate (2025) Municipality Tax Revenue Per Unit / m2 Residential Units Per Unit Low Density 576 $500,000 $288,062,500 0.004432560 $1,276,854 $2,216.28 Medium Density 1,831 $375,000 $686,671,875 0.004432560 $3,043,714 $1,662.21 High Density 10,320 $250,000 $2,580,000,000 0.004875820 $12,579,616 $1,218.96 Non-Res. m2 Per m2 Population- Related 388,754 $3,200 $1,244,012,550 0.006427210 $7,995,530 $20.57 Total $4,479,528,175 $23,480,758 Generally, development of the CTOC Area is anticipated to generate higher taxation revenues per capita and employment than the current (2023) Municipality-wide averages (see Table 10). This reflects the higher assessed values of newer homes, which are typically larger and constructed with more modern materials and amenities. Table 10: Municipal Property Tax Revenue Comparison with Municipality Average Revenue / Job Revenue Job Residential $15,485,228 $771.06 $65,623,144 $603.37 C. DEVELOPMENT CHARGE REVENUE Table 11 summarizes the development charge revenue that would be generated up to full build-out of the CTOC Area, using current (2025) development charge rates. The development charge revenue calculations account for the inability of the Municipality to impose DCs for social housing and public health. Page 213 Revenue Analysis | 16 The calculations do not account for DC revenue loss arising from the following changes arising from the More Homes Built Faster Act 2022: rental housing discounts, exemptions for affordable housing, attainable housing, non-profit housing, and inclusionary zoning, changes to historical service level calculations, fixed interest rates on frozen DCs, and potential ineligibility of certain capital costs (e.g. land acquisition). Any such revenue loss is assumed to be minor or indeterminable for the CTOC Area at the present time. Page 214 Revenue Analysis | 17 Table 11: Development Charge Revenue Generated in CTOC (Current Rates) Residential Non-Residential Low Density Density Area Core Office District Industrial Other Total Municipal DCs Library Service $855,546 $1,191,528 $1,436,220 $4,123,470 $0 $0 $0 $7,606,764 Fire Services $385,428 $537,951 $649,026 $1,853,436 $322,051 $478,502 $610,867 $4,837,260 Recreation $6,522,311 $9,092,260 $10,958,904 $31,465,902 $0 $0 $0 $58,039,377 Operations $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Government $268,474 $374,312 $450,864 $1,292,304 $126,520 $187,983 $239,983 $2,940,440 Roads $10,199,717 $14,217,986 $17,134,650 $49,192,572 $13,550,905 $6,595,171 $25,703,383 $195,335,934 Total CTOC Area DC $18,231,476 $25,414,038 $30,629,664 $87,927,684 $13,999,476 $7,261,655 $26,554,233 $268,759,775 Note. Other Res includes Special Care units. . Page 215 Summary of Fiscal Impact | 18 5. SUMMARY OF FISCAL IMPACT Table 12 provides an overall summary of the estimated fiscal impacts associated with the full build-out of the CTOC Area. Revenues are projected at $869 per capita and employment per year, while expenditures are estimated at $949, resulting in an annual deficit of approximately $80 per capita and employment, or a -9% difference. Table 12: Overall Findings Revenue or Expenses Total Amount $/Person & Employee Revenue Assessment $ 23,480,758 $ 869 Expenses Developer Constructed Assets - AMP Contribution $ 1,489,545 $ 55 DC Funded Assets - AMP Contribution $ 4,776,442 $ 177 Municipal-Funded Assets - AMP Contribution $ - $ - Net Operating Impacts $ 19,385,788 $ 717 Net Difference ($) $ (2,171,018) $ (80) Net Difference (%) -9%-9% Before reviewing the key implications, it is important to reiterate that the main purpose of the analysis is to inform decisions regarding the Courtice Transit-Oriented Community Secondary Plan as it relates to the CTOC Area. The fiscal impact analysis results should not be viewed as precise forecasts of what will occur at full build-out of the CTOC Area. The results point to incremental operating cost efficiencies within the CTOC Area. Due to economies of scale arising from the high density of development, the cost to service new residents and employees is expected to be lower on a per capita basis than the cost to services existing populations. As well, the relatively high assessed values of new apartment units, commercial, and institutional developments in the CTOC Area are expected to generate higher property taxes per capita/employee than existing development in the Municipality. Overall, the CTOC Area is anticipated to be fiscally sustainable over the long- term. Page 216 Summary of Fiscal Impact | 19 That said, several areas of caution must be noted: First, the analysis uses minimum estimates of total units, population, and employment at full build-out, and as such estimates could be considered conservative relative estimates of costs and revenues that would be estimated using the target amounts. It is also possible that estimates based on targets for units, population, and employment as opposed to minimum estimates may show relatively lower per unit cost, reflecting greater economies of scale. Second, the analysis assumes full municipal funding of new infrastructure lifecycle costs. In reality, contributions toward lifecycle funding for existing infrastructure may not currently meet 100% of calculated needs. Moreover, infrastructure renewal requirements are expected to grow as existing infrastructure ages and is adapted to address climate change. Third, the fiscal projections of development charge revenue assume the use of the Municipality’s current development charge rates and therefore do not account for the anticipated passage of the new DC by-law in December 2025. As the DC rates to be set under the planned by-law would be comparatively higher than current rates, the total CTOC Area DC revenue is likely to exceed estimates when the new rates are implemented. In addition, any future legislative changes that restrict the ability to levy development charges could materially affect the financial outlook set out in this report negatively. Finally, the fiscal impact analysis evaluates the fiscal impact at full build-out of the CTOC Area. However, costs associated with financing CTOC Area infrastructure—such as debt costs incurred to cover servicing expenditures prior to development—are not included in the analysis. Page 217 SPECIALIST IN LAND MANAGEMENT + DEVELOPMENT Page 1 of 2 8800 Dufferin St. Suite 104 T 905 660 7667 Vaughan Ontario L4K 0C5 DELTAURBAN.COM December 8th, 2025 SENT VIA EMAIL: “clerks@clarington.net” Municipality of Clarington 40 Temperance St Bowmanville, ON, L1C 3A6 Attention: Mayor Foster and Members of Council: RE: COURTICE TRANSIT-ORIENTED COMMUNITY SECONDARY PLAN (DECEMBER 2025) STAFF REPORT PDS-066-25 COURTICE TOC LANDOWNERS GROUP INC. Dear Mayor Foster and Members of Council, We are writing in our capacity as Group Manager on behalf of the registered landowners within the Courtice Transit-Oriented Community Secondary Plan (“CTOCSP”) area who comprise the Courtice TOC Landowners Group (the “Group”), being Tribute (King Street) Limited, Your Home Developments (1200 Trulls) Inc., Brookfield Residential (Ontario) Limited, and 2610144 Ontario Limited. The Group has actively participated throughout the development of the Secondary Plan and has provided comments and supporting materials at several stages of the process. We appreciate the significant effort and collaboration demonstrated by Municipal staff and the consulting team, and we are generally satisfied with the direction of the current draft. As the Secondary Plan proceeds to Committee, the Group respectfully requests the incorporation of wording adjustments to policies 4.5.4 and 4.5.5, to more accurately reflect development feasibility considerations. The proposed revisions are outlined below. Current Wording Policy 4.5.4 and 4.5.5 currently state: 4.5.4 - “New development outside the Mixed Use Core shall consider and integrate, where feasible, the district energy system. Should connection to the district energy system not be feasible, new development shall consider the use of other low carbon thermal energy technologies such as geo - exchange, wastewater energy, and heat recovery from sources such as data centres and industry to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.” 4.5.5 - “New development shall consider and integrate where feasible: a.Decentralized on-site renewable energy generation such as solar photovoltaic (PV) panels and energy storage, such as battery storage, to manage peak electricity demand, reduce emissions, and strengthen energy resilience; and b.Backup power for protection from area-wide power outages, including in residential buildings, as informed by guidelines developed by the Municipality.” Page 218 SPECIALIST IN LAND MANAGEMENT + DEVELOPMENT Page 2 of 2 8800 Dufferin St. Suite 104 T 905 660 7667 Vaughan Ontario L4K 0C5 DELTAURBAN.COM Proposed Wording Changes Policy 4.5.4 and 4.5.5 with revised language: 4.5.4 - “New development outside the Mixed Use Core shall consider and MAY integrate, where feasible, the district energy system. Should connection to the district energy system not be feasible, new development shall consider the use of other low carbon thermal energy technologies such as geo-exchange, wastewater energy, and heat recovery from sources such as data centres and industry to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.” 4.5.5 - “New development shall consider and MAY integrate where feasible: a.Decentralized on-site renewable energy generation such as solar photovoltaic (PV) panels and energy storage, such as battery storage, to manage peak electricity demand, reduce emissions, and strengthen energy resilience; and b.Backup power for protection from area-wide power outages, including in residential buildings, as informed by guidelines developed by the Municipality.” Upon incorporation of this change, we believe the majority of our concerns have been otherwise addressed and are generally supportive of the plan being recommended for approval. Further, while we are broadly supportive of the work undertaken to date, we respectfully reserve all rights to provide further submissions and to file an appeal under the Planning Act should Council’s decision give rise to matters requiring further review. We acknowledge and sincerely appreciate the Municipality’s collaborative approach and the opportunity to participate in this important planning exercise. Should you have any questions or require additional information, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned. Yours very truly, On Behalf of the Courtice TOC Landowners Group Mustafa Ghassan, BES, M.Eng-CEM Delta Urban Inc. CC.Lisa Backus, MCIP, RPP Municipality of Clarington Amanda Crompton, MCIP, RPP, Municipality of Clarington Courtice TOC Landowners Group members Page 219 Staff Report If this information is required in an alternate accessible format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131. Report To: Planning and Development Committee Date of Meeting: December 8, 2025 Report Number: PDS-067-25 Authored By: Alicia da Silva, Planner I, Community Planning, Planning and Infrastructure Services Submitted By: Darryl Lyons, Deputy CAO, Planning and Infrastructure Services Reviewed By: Mary-Anne Dempster, CAO By-law Number: Resolution Number: File Number: PDS-067-25 Report Subject: Intention to Pursue Heritage Designation of 4-10 King Avenue East, Newcastle Recommendations: 1. That Report PDS-067-25, and any related delegations or communication items, be received; 2. That the Clerk issue a Notice of Intention to Designate 4-10 King Avenue East, Newcastle as a cultural heritage resource as an individual designation under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act 3. That the Clerk prepare the necessary by-laws if no objection(s) are received within 30 days after the date of publication of the Notice of Intention or staff will report back to Council regarding objection(s); and 4. That all interested parties listed in Report PDS-067-25 and any delegations be advised of Council’s decision. Page 220 Municipality of Clarington Page 2 Report PDS-067-25 Report Overview Ontario Heritage Act. Ontario Heritage Act resources are appropriately conserved and continue to be an integral part of Clarington’s Ontario Heritage Act. 1. Background Introduction 1.1 Cultural heritage is important to reflect the history, traditions, and values of a community. It also contributes to a sense of place that fosters a community's identit y and cohesion. 1.2 Council holds the responsibility to designate a property under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act (OHA) when it concludes that the property meets the criteria outlined in Ontario Regulation 9/06 (O.Reg. 9/06), indicating cultural heritage value or interest. A property is required to meet two or more criteria outlined in O.Reg. 9/06 to be designated. Bill 23 and the Municipal Register 1.3 The OHA was amended by the More Homes Built Faster Act (Bill 23), which came into effect on November 28, 2022. Bill 23 amended the OHA in that a non-designated property on the Municipal Register be removed from the Register after two years if no Notice of Intention to Designate has been issued. 1.4 Clarington has 55 listed properties on the Municipal Register that must be evaluated and a Notice of Intention to Designate the property (if warranted) given prior to January 1, 2027 or they will be automatically removed from the list. 1.5 Evaluation of the listed properties is underway in accordance with the criteria under the OHA. PDS-035-25 recommended designation of five properties under the Part IV of the OHA, with designation by-laws being passed by Council in November 2025. The Clarington Heritage Committee (CHC) is actively reviewing the remaining listed properties and will provide recommendations to Council to ensure all properties are assessed before the legislated deadline. Council provided budget for the completion of the evaluations in 2023. Page 221 Municipality of Clarington Page 3 Report PDS-067-25 Property proposed to be designated 1.6 The Clarington Heritage Committee (CHC) conducted a preliminary evaluation of 4-10 King Avenue East, Newcastle, which is listed on the Municipal Register. See Figures 1 and 2 below. Figure 1: Streetview of 4-10 King Avenue East, Newcastle 1.7 Using this information as a starting point, Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. (ARA) conducted an evaluation and completed a Cultural Heritage Evaluation report for the subject property. The report concluded that the subject property contained significant heritage attributes, indicating it meets the designation criteria outlined in O.Reg 9/06 and recommended the property be designated. The CHC and ARA collectively recommend designation of the subject property. 1.8 The Statement of Significance and List of Character-Defining Features for the property can be found in Attachment 1 of this report. Page 222 Municipality of Clarington Page 4 Report PDS-067-25 Figure 2: Location of 4-10 King Avenue East in Newcastle 2. Protecting Cultural Heritage Resources 2.1 The conservation of significant natural, cultural, and archaeologica l resources is a matter of provincial interest identified in the Provincial Planning Statement (PPS) 2024, which is reinforced by the OHA. 2.2 The PPS includes policies that promote the protection of heritage properties. According to Section 4.6, protected heritage properties can contain both built heritage resources or cultural heritage landscapes and shall be conserved. Planning authorities are encouraged to develop and implement proactive strategies for conserving significant built heritage resources and cultural heritage landscapes. Designation provides a mechanism to achieve the necessary protection. 3. Legislation Ontario Heritage Act 3.1 The OHA empowers a municipality to pass a by-law to designate properties that it considered to be of cultural heritage significance, in consultation with its Heritage Committee. The CHC supports the designation of the subject property. Page 223 Municipality of Clarington Page 5 Report PDS-067-25 3.2 The OHA outlines the process to designate a property. Now that the CHC has recommended the designation to Council, the next step in the designation process (should Council support the designation) is publishing the Notice of Intention to Designate in the locally circulated newspaper and the municipal website. A summary description of the heritage designation process is found in Attachment 2 of this report. 3.3 Once a property is designated by by-law under Part IV of the OHA, the property owner is required to obtain consent for any proposed significant alterations to the building’s heritage features that are listed in the designation by-law, or for demolition of all or part of the structure, or its significant attributes. Envision Durham: Region of Durham Official Plan 3.4 Envision Durham, the Region of Durham Official Plan, outlines objectives for complete communities, which includes promoting the conservation, protection and enhancement of built and cultural heritage resources and landscapes. This section encourages municipalities to utilize the OHA to conserve, protect and enhance the built and cultural heritage resources of the municipality. 3.5 Envision Durham prioritizes the recognition, conservation, and enhancement of cultural heritage such as downtowns, historical areas, scenic lookout areas, archaeological sites or natural elements that are valued together for their interrelationship, meaning or association with the community. Clarington Official Plan 3.6 Promoting cultural heritage conservation is identified as a goal to foster civic pride and a sense of place, strengthen the local economy and enhance the quality of life for Clarington residents. Section 8 of the Clarington Official Plan, 2018 directs the designation of cultural heritage resources under Part IV of the OHA, with assistance from the CHC, in support of achieving the Municipality’s cultural heritage objectives. 4. Communications 4.1 Prior to completing the Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report for the listed property, a letter was sent to the property owner of the subject property inviting them to a heritage information session. They were also notified that the municipality was starting the heritage evaluation process for their property. 4.2 Staff communicated with the subject property owner sharing that Cultural Heritage Evaluation Reports had been completed on their property and provided a copy of the report. They were also invited to attend the CHC meeting wh en the report was being discussed. They were informed of the Committee’s recommendations. Page 224 Municipality of Clarington Page 6 Report PDS-067-25 5. 4-10 King Avenue East, Newcastle 5.1 4-10 King Avenue East is located in the commercial core of the Village of Newcastle, at the historic four-corners. As outlined in the Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report, it is a two-storey Italianate building constructed in circa 1859. The property is a representative example of a building constructed in the Italianate architectural style, specifically the commercial Italianate form. The property is also important in defining, supporting, and maintaining the four corners of the commercial core within the historic Village of Newcastle. The development of the commercial core in the mid-to-late 19th century played a significant role in the social and economic development and growth of the community of Newcastle, which resulted in its incorporation as a village in 1856 5.2 The Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report indicates the property meets the designation criteria (see above description) and recommends the property be designated. The report was circulated to the CHC and the property owner and was reviewed by Staff. 5.3 The CHC passed Motion 25.59 in October of this year, to recommend to Council the designation of 4-10 King Avenue East, Newcastle under Part IV of the OHA. Staff notified the property owner of the Committee recommendation, and the property owner has not objected to designation. 5.4 See Attachment 1 for a detailed Statement of Significance and List of Character- Defining Features. 6. Financial Considerations 6.1 Potential future financial consideration may be to hire e xternal heritage consultants to provide evidence at the Ontario Land Tribunal (OLT) in support of designation if an appeal is made. External legal services may also be required in the event of any appeals to the OLT. 7. Strategic Plan 7.1 The Clarington Strategic Plan 2024-27 outlines the objectives to cultivate a strong, thriving, and connected community where everyone is welcome. Designation of the subject properties contributes to achieving one of the priorities (Connect 4.1) that promotes and supports local arts, culture, and heritage sectors. 8. Climate Change Not Applicable. Page 225 Municipality of Clarington Page 7 Report PDS-067-25 9. Conclusion 9.1 The Clarington Heritage Committee and Staff are in support of the designation of 4-10 King Avenue East, Newcastle under Part IV of the OHA. 9.2 Should no objections be received by the Municipal Clerk within 30 days of publishing the Notice of Intention to designate, the proposed by-law designating the property will be forwarded to Council for approval. Alternatively, if an objection(s) is received, Staff will provide a report to Council. 9.3 Upon designation, the owner of the property will be presented with a bronze plaque signifying the significance of the property to the community and the Municipality as a whole. 9.4 It is respectfully recommended that the Recommendations be adopted as presented . Staff Contact: Alicia da Silva, Planner I, adasilva@clarington.net, 905-623-3379 ext. 2340 and Lisa Backus, Manager of Community Planning, lbackus@clarington.net , 905-623-3379.. Attachments: Attachment 1 to PDS-067-25 Statement of Significance Attachment 2 to PDS-067-25 Heritage Designation Process Interested Parties: List of Interested Parties available from Department. Page 226 1 4-10 King Avenue East, Newcastle Statement of Significance and List of Character-Defining Features Description 4-10 King Avenue East is located in the commercial core of the historic Village of Newcastle, at the historic four-corners. It consists of a two-storey Italianate building constructed in circa 1859. Physical/Design Value 4-10 King Avenue East is a representative example of a building constructed in the Italianate architectural style, specifically the commercial Italianate form. The two -storey red brick building is composed of two distinct sections divided by a fire wall which create a rectangular plan fronting towards King Avenue East. The heavily ornamented side gable roof and one-storey rear wing located on Mill Street carry through the Italianate aesthetic and emphasize the buildings’ location on the corner. The building has predominantly segmentally arched window openings with brick voussoirs and tin clad sills which is typical of Italianate architecture. The building showcases eave returns and an ornate bracketed cornice along façade and west elevation composed of indiv idual projecting brackets of varying sizes and molded frieze board which are key characteristic associated with Italianate design. The building has a balanced façade, with each section showcasing balanced composition and rhythmic elements. The west portion of the building, known as 4 King Avenue East, include a three bay façade with two entryway openings topped with rectangular transoms, whereas the east sections centrally placed entrance includes decorative transom and sidelights flanked by one- storey canted bay windows. The bay windows are topped by truncated hip roofs with bracketed cornices and include decorative brickwork features which are representative of the Italianate architectural style. Contextual Value 4-10 King Avenue East is important in defining, supporting, and maintaining the four corners of the commercial core within the historic village of Newcastle. The development of the commercial core in the mid -to-late 19th century played a significant role in the social and economic development and growth of the community of Newcastle, which resulted in its incorporation as a village in 1856. The lots lines, layout, and built form of the historic core is consistent with typical 19th century commercial streetscape found throughout Ontario. The King Avenue streetscape is comprised of predominantly one- to two-storey commercial and institutional buildings of primarily brick construction with narrow, uniformed setbacks along the street. Furthermore, the stylistic similarities between several properties, including red brick construction, ornamented Attachment 1 To Report PDS-067-25 Page 227 ATTACHMENT 1 TO PDS-067-25 2 rooflines, decorative brickwork and balanced façades with formal entrances, strengthens their contribution to the historic character of the commercial area. 4 -10 King Avenue East helps support the historic core through its setback, massing, and decorative details which is consistent with the surrounding area. Due to its prominent location at the north-east corner of King Avenue East and Mill Street, 4-10 King Avenue East importance at the historic four corners is reinforced by the detailed ornamentation on both the façade and west elevation. The four corners anchor the commercial core in the historic village of Newcastle and defines the east and west side of King Avenue . Description of Heritage Attributes 4- 10 King Avenue East is a representative example of a building constructed in the Italianate architectural style, specifically the commercial Italianate form. The property contains the following heritage attributes that reflects this value: 4 King Avenue East o Two-storey building constructed in the Italianate commercial architectural style o Red brick construction o Balanced three-bay façade o One-storey rear wing with gable roof and segmentally arched window with brick voussoirs o Side gable roof with return eaves o Decorative bracketed cornice with molded frieze board along façade roofline and side gable roof o Segmentally arched window openings with tin clad sills o Two entryway openings topped with segmentally arched transoms 10 King Avenue East o Symmetrical three-bay façade o Decorative bracketed cornice with molded frieze board along façade roofline o Segmentally arched window openings with tin clad sills o Centrally placed formal entrance opening with transom and sidelights o Canted bay windows with truncated hip roofs, bracketed cornices, and decorative brickwork 4-10 King Avenue East is important in defining, supporting, and maintaining the four corners of the commercial core within the historic village of Newcastle. The property contains the following heritage attributes that reflect this value: o Two-storey building constructed in the Italianate commercial architectural style o One-storey attached wing located along Mill Street o Red brick construction o Location at intersection of King Avenue and Mill Street Page 228 ATTACHMENT 1 TO PDS-067-25 3 o Overall massing, setback, and decorative details The following heritage attributes were provided by the Clarington Heritage Committee at their meeting on October 21st, 2025: o The building at 4-10 King Avenue East, Newcastle was Newcastle Village’s post office from 1880-1923; and o 4-10 King Avenue East, along with the two addresses 57 Mill Street South, and 15 King Avenue West, were part of the Newcastle Village four corners, as discussed in the Feb 22, 2010 Staff report (PSD-031-10). Page 229 Designation Proposed Council consults with the Heritage Committee Council Decision: Proceed with Designation? Notice of Intention to Designate: Designation by-law passed Notice of Designation: •Served on property owner •Served on the Ontario Heritage Trust •Right to objection •Published in accordance with the Ontario Heritage Act •Served on property owner •Served on the Ontario Heritage Trust •Served any person who objected •Right to appeal •Published in accordance with the Ontario Heritage Act NO YES If NO objection within 30 days NO IF Property not designated If objection within 30 days Council to Reconsider Designation of Property Notice of Withdrawal Appeal to Ontario Land Tribunal (OLT) within 30 days after publishing the Notice of Designation OLT Hearing and Decision Designation Process by Municipal By-Law Council Decision: Designate property YES If NO appeal the Designation By-Law comes into effect Attachment 2 to Report PDS-067-25 Page 230 Staff Report If this information is required in an alternate accessible format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131. Report To: Planning and Development Committee Date of Meeting: December 8, 2025 Report Number: PDS-073-25 Authored By: Sarah Allin, Principal Planner, Planning and Infrastructure Services Submitted By: Darryl Lyons, Deputy CAO, Planning and Infrastructure Services Reviewed By: Mary-Anne Dempster, CAO By-law Number: Resolution Number: File Number: PLN 1.1.36 Report Subject: Bill 60: Fighting Delays, Building Faster Act, 2025 and Provincial Consultation on Simplifying and Standardizing Official Plans – Comments Recommendations: 1. That Report PDS-073-25, and any related delegations or communication items, be received; 2. That Report PDS-073-25, including the Detailed Comments forming Attachment 1, be endorsed as the Municipality’s comments to the Province on the Fighting Delays, Building Faster Act, 2025 (Bill 60) (Environmental Registry of Ontario Postings: 025- 1097, 025-1182, 025-1182, 025-1100, and 025-1101) and forwarded to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing; 3. That Report PDS-073-25, including the Detailed Comments forming Attachment 2, be endorsed as the Municipality’s comments to the Province on the Consultation on Simplifying and Standardizing Official Plans (ERO Posting 025-1099) and forwarded to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing; and 4. That all interested parties listed in Report PDS-073-25, be advised of Council’s decision. Page 231 Municipality of Clarington Page 2 Report PDS-073-25 Report Overview Fighting Delays, Building Faster Act, 2025 Planning Act Development Charges Act GO Transit Funding Act Transit Oriented Communities Act Highway Traffic Act regional municipalities’ ability to adopt and implement Community Improvement Plans, and supports the Province’s efforts to look at oppor ies’ present staff’s comments the Province on November 21, 2025, subject to Council’s ratification, Page 232 Municipality of Clarington Page 3 Report PDS-073-25 1. Background 1.1 On October 22, 2025 Province released Bill 60, the Fighting Delays, Building Faster Act, 2025. Bill 60 is another omnibus bill proposing changes to numerous Acts that are relevant to municipalities, including the Planning Act, Development Charges Act, GO Transit Funding Act, the Transit Oriented Communities Act, and the Highway Traffic Act. 1.2 On October 22, 2025, the Province also posted consultation materials relating to: Simplifying and Standardizing Official Plans, Enhanced Development Standards, and standardizing Minimum Lot Sizes. 1.3 A 30-day comment window was provided to receive feedback on all proposed changes and consultation documents. A number of Environmental Registry of Ontario (ERO) postings and Ontario Regulatory Registry (ORR) proposals relate to the proposed changes. This report focuses on the following postings: ERO 025-1097: Proposed Changes to the Planning Act (Schedule 10 of Bill 60 - the Fighting Delays, Building Faster Act, 2025) ERO 025-1182: Proposed Changes to the GO Transit Station Funding Act (Schedule 4 of Bill 60 - Fighting Delays, Building Faster Act, 2025) ERO 025-1100: Consultation on Minimum Lot Sizes ERO 025-1101: Consultation on Enhanced Development Standards – Lot Level (outside of buildings) ERO 025-1099: Consultation on Simplifying and Standardizing Official Plans 1.4 The Province also released a Technical Briefing document that provides and overview of the changes and how Bill 60 and associated consultation documents support the Province’s objectives to streamline the construction of new homes and infrastructure. 2. Bill 60 Summary and Key Comments 2.1 The following section provides a high-level summary of relevant changes introduced by Bill 60. Detailed staff comments on the proposed changes are provided in Attachment 1. Planning Act Amendments 2.2 Currently, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing’s (MAH) decisions, including those on official plans, are required to be consistent with provincial planning statements and conform to provincial plans. Proposed changes would provide greater authority to the Minister to make planning decisions to advance provincial prioriti es without being required to be consistent with provincial planning statements or provincial plans. This is similar to the flexibility previously granted to Minster’s Zoning Orders (MZOs). It is noted this would not apply to lands within the Greenbelt Plan Area. Page 233 Municipality of Clarington Page 4 Report PDS-073-25 2.3 Currently, official plan policies or amendments to policies affecting Protected Major Transit Station Areas (PMTSAs) must be approved by the Minister of MAH. Amendments would remove the requirement for Ministry approval of official plan policies or amendments to policies that identify the lands uses in the PMTSA, provided residential uses would be permitted on all the lands subject to the amendment. Amendments to PMTSA policies related to the people and jobs per hectare minimum target, and minimum densities would continue to be subject to approval by the Minister. It is noted decisions of Council are subject to appeal, whereas decisions by the Minister are not. 2.4 Proposed changes would enable any upper-tier municipality to adopt a Community Improvement Plan (CIP)would and restore previously existing CIPs of upper-tier municipalities that lost planning responsibilities, such as Durham Region. 2.5 Recently, the Protect Ontario by Building Faster and Smarter Act, 2025 (Bill 17) amended the Planning Act to allow as-of-right variances to minimum setback requirements on urban residential lands. Ontario Regulation 257/25 came into force on November 21, 2025, implementing the as-of-right variances to minimum setback. O. Reg. 257/25 states the minimum setback distance is now deemed to be 90 percent of the distance specified by the applicable zoning by-law. Staff is reviewing the impacts of this change for development proposals. 2.6 Bill 60 proposes changes to the Planning Act that would provide the Minister of MAH authority to enact regulations for additional as-of-right variances from locally established minimum and maximum zoning provisions. The type and degree of variance would be prescribed and could relate to height, lot coverage, etc. on specified lands (e.g. urban residential lands). Transition provisions relating to as-of-right variances are also proposed. Staff will continue to monitor for updates relating to regulations implementing additional types of as-of-right variances introduced by Bill 60 and assess implications. 2.7 Currently, MZOs are made by Minister’s regulation under the Planning Act. Changes are proposed whereby MZOs would no longer be regulations. The Province indicates this is intended to streamline its internal processes to facilitate faster decisions. MZOs would still follow the current MZO framework. GO Transit Station Funding Act Changes 2.8 Bill 60 proposes amendments to the GO Transit Station Funding Act, 2023 to provide municipalities with greater flexibility in determining when Transit Station Charges are to be paid. Under the proposed changes, municipalities may choose to collect the charge either at the time of permit issuance or at building occupancy for new residential developments near future GO Transit stations. 2.9 These changes are consistent with recent amendments to the Development Charges Act, 1997 introduced through Bill 17 earlier this year, which similarly provide flexibility in the timing of development charge payments. Page 234 Municipality of Clarington Page 5 Report PDS-073-25 Development Charges Act Changes 2.10 Proposed changes include the creation of a new service class for land. Land, which could be included in other service categories, will be removed as part of the eligible costs for services and included in its own service category. 2.11 The Province is also proposing to require municipalities to provide copies of the DC Background Study and the by-law to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing upon request. 2.12 The annual “Treasurer Statement” will be required to be completed by June 30th of each year, and provided to the Minister by July 15th. The Municipality already complies with these timelines and posts the statements on its website in advance of these dates. There are proposed increased requirements for disclosure in the Treasurer Statement annually which will provide additional financial transparency for the Reserve Funds of each DC service category. 2.13 The DC Background Study is proposed to include requirements for “Local Service Policy”. The Municipality already includes this in its study and by-law. Consultation on Minimum Lot Sizes 2.14 In connection with Bill 60, the Province is consulting on the risks and benefits of reducing or removing minimum lot size requirements on parcels of urban residential land, as defined in the Planning Act (those that include full municipal water and wastewater servicing). Currently, municipalities have authority to establish zoning by-laws that are specific to certain geographic areas and neighbourhoods in consideration of local context, including minimum lot size, setbacks, lot coverage, and height. Consultation on Enhanced Development Standards 2.15 Earlier this year as part of the Bill 17 changes to the Building Code Act, the Province clarified that municipalities are not able to create or enforce their own construction standards. 2.16 The consultation documents suggest changes that will further limit municipalities' ability to implement mandatory green development standards, beyond building construction, by removing lot level, outside of the building standards from the scope of site plan control (e.g. bioswales, requirements for native species planting, etc.). The Province has indicated its intent would be to eliminate enhanced site plan controls on development standards by the spring construction season. Page 235 Municipality of Clarington Page 6 Report PDS-073-25 Key Comments 2.17 Detailed staff comments are included as Attachment 1 to this report, and key messages are articulated below. 2.18 Staff generally supports the proposed changes to the Planning Act that would: Enable municipal councils to approve policies relating to the use of land, buildings or structures within PMTSAs. This would remove an additional layer of approval and speed up implementation in critical strategic growth areas; and Reinstate upper-tier municipalities’ ability to adopt and implement CIPs, and to provide funding support for community development initiatives. 2.19 Staff does not support additional as-of-right variances to the zoning by-law or provincially standardized minimum lot sizes and zoning requirements. Staff has concerns about the cumulative impacts of as-of-right variances on the function of the neighbourhood and supportive infrastructure in the absence of a review process. These changes reduce municipalities’ autonomy to establish minimum lot sizes that properly consider local context and service levels. 2.20 Clarington’s green municipal framework is currently under development. The program has been modified from a mandatory set of standards to a voluntary framework in response to the Province’s Bill 17 restrictions on green construction standards. Additional limits to remove green lot level standards from the scope of site plan control reinforces this change in direction to a voluntary green development framework. 2.21 Notwithstanding comment 2.19, the Province is requested to maintain municipalities’ use of site plan control, to implement development standards that align with strategic and policy directions relating to energy conservation, air quality, and climate change resilience that are also consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement, 2024. 2.22 Clarington staff supports the Province’s efforts to facilitate increasing Ontario’s housing supply and associated infrastructure and looks forward working with the Province to achieve these goals in an environmentally, socially, and fiscally responsible way. 3. Official Plan Content Consultation Summary and Key Comments 3.1 The Province indicated it has received concerns that municipal official plans have become lengthy, complicated, restrictive documents that take years to prepare and update, are difficult to understand, and vary widely between municipalities. 3.2 In response, the Province is consulting on how to simplify, standardize and make more permissive municipal official plans so they are shorter, easier to understand, and more consistent across Ontario (ERO Posting 025-1099). Page 236 Municipality of Clarington Page 7 Report PDS-073-25 3.3 Proposed changes include (i) standardizing the structure including requiring specific chapters in specific order (ii) limiting the length of official plans (e.g. 250 pages or 65,000 words), and creating standardized but more permissive land use designations. 3.4 The consultation documents consist of a series of discussion questions and acknowledge the important role of official plans in: Setting goals for future development and policies on how to reach these goals; Helping communities decide where and how to grow or build; Making sure that growth is coordinated and meets the community’s needs; Helping communities effectively manage land and resources while protecting the natural environment; Providing a framework for establishing municipal zoning by-laws to set local regulations and standards, like the minimum and maximum size of lots and heigh t of buildings; and Providing a way to evaluate and settle conflicting land uses while meeting local, regional, and provincial interests. Key Comments 3.5 Detailed staff comments are included as Attachment 2 to this report, and key messages are below. 3.6 Clarington staff supports the Province’s efforts to look at how official plans are structured and used to appropriately guide development within municipalities across Ontario. 3.7 Staff does not support standardization (e.g. page limits) where it affects the value of the content and is concerned about the extent to which simplification could undermine the purpose of a municipal official plan, which is to set out the long-term vision for how a community sees itself growing in the context of what Council and res idents value. 3.8 Staff requests the Province to maintain municipal autonomy in developing official plans, and not remove the ability to undertake secondary plans to implement provincial direction in a way that celebrates the character and unique attributes of each city, town, and countryside. 3.9 Staff would not support transition provisions that require municipalities to comply with a new official plan framework by a specific date (e.g. within two years). Staff would support transition provisions that require official plans to comply with a new official plan framework, or any updated requirements of the Province, at the next scheduled five- or ten-year review. Implementing provincial updates as part of their scheduled review would better enable municipalities to plan and budget for the significant resources required to undertake an update to the Official Plan, reducing impacts on resources and other projects. Page 237 Municipality of Clarington Page 8 Report PDS-073-25 3.10 Staff looks forward to working collaboratively with the Province to improve the effectiveness of official plans, striking a balance by increasing and diversifying Ontario’s housing supply in way that recognizes local values and meets the community’s needs. 4. Financial Considerations 4.1 Financial implications of Bill 60 and changes to official plan content resulting from the ongoing provincial consultation are difficult to assess at this time, as many details and implementing regulations have not yet been released. Staff will continue to monitor the impacts of these changes incorporate them, as necessary, into budgeting processes going forward. 5. Strategic Plan 5.1 The changes proposed by Bill 60 and the results of the consultation on the content of municipal official plans have the potential to impact how Clarington achieves the Lead priorities of the Strategic Plan to promote effective and long-term fiscal management, and the Grow Responsibly priorities to design and implement Priority Green Standards for all developments. 6. Climate Change 6.1 The changes proposed have potential to impact Clarington’s ability to achieve its Strategic Plan climate change related objectives to: Grow resilient, sustainable and complete communities supported by the development of priority green development standards for development applications; and Be a leader in anticipating and addressing the impacts of climate change by advocating for provincial and federal legislation, regulation, and policy changes that are aimed at reducing carbon emissions. 7. Concurrence 7.1 This report has been reviewed by the Deputy CAO/Treasurer who concurs with the recommendations. Page 238 Municipality of Clarington Page 9 Report PDS-073-25 8. Conclusion 8.1 The purpose of this report is to (i) provide a high-level summary of the changes introduced by the Fighting Delays, Building Faster Act, 2025 (Bill 60), and topics open for consultation on official plan content, and development standards, and (ii) present staff’s draft comments which were submitted to the Province, subject to Council’s ratification, before the 30-day comment period closed on November 22, 2025. 8.2 It is respectfully recommended the Recommendations be adopted as presented. Staff Contact: Sarah Allin, Principal Planner, sallin@clarington.net or 905-623-3379 ext. 2419 or Lisa Backus, Manager of Community Planning, lbackus@clarington.net or 905-623-3379 ext.2413. Attachments: Attachment 1 – Draft Staff Comments on Bill 60 - Fighting Delays, Building Faster Act, 2025, Consultation on Minimum Lot Sizes, and Consultation on Enhanced Development Standards Attachment 2 – Draft Staff Comments on Consultation on simplifying and standardizing official plans Interested Parties: List of Interested Parties available from Department. Page 239 Attachment 1 to Report PDS-073-25 Attachment 1 to PDS-073-25 – DRAFT Staff Comments on Bill 60 - Fighting Delays, Building Faster Act, 2025, Consultation on Minimum Lot Sizes, and Consultation on Enhanced Development Standards Comments on Bill 60 Item Number ERO/ORR Number Title of ERO/ORR Post Section Overview of Proposed Change Staff Supports Change? Staff Comments 1 025-1097 Changes to the Planning Act (Schedule 10) 3 Policy Statements Currently, Minister’s decisions (e.g. on official plans) are required to be consistent with the provincial planning statements and conform to provincial plans. New subsections 3(5.1) and 3(5.2) provide greater authority to the Minister to make other planning decisions to advance provincial priorities without being required to be consistent with provincial planning statements or provincial plans, similar to the flexibility previously granted to Minster’s Zoning Orders (MZOs). It is noted this would not apply to lands within the Greenbelt Plan Area. No The Province is requested to provide additional information as to the types of circumstances in which this type of decision might occur. 2 16 Contents of Official Plan – Protected Major Transit Station Areas Currently, official plan policies or amendments affecting Protected Major Transit Station Areas (PMTSAs) must be approved by the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing and are not subject to appeal. A new subsection 16(18.1) would remove the requirement for Ministry approval of official plan policies or amendments to policies that identify the authorized uses of land, buildings or structures in the PMTSA, provided residential uses would be authorized on all of the lands within the PMTSA that are subject to the amendment. It is noted decisions of Council are subject to appeal, whereas decisions by the Minister are not. Amendments to PMTSA policies related to the people and jobs per hectare minimum target, and minimum densities would continue to be subject to approval by the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. Yes Staff generally supports the proposed change to enable Council to approve policies or amendments to policies relating to the use of lands within PMTSAs. This would remove an additional layer of approval and speed up implementation of in these critical strategic growth areas. 3 28 Community Improvement Plans Currently, only prescribed upper-tier municipalities can establish Community Improvement Plans (CIPs), and upper tier municipalities that lost planning responsibilities, such as Durham Region, are no longer able to establish, implement, or continue to provide funding support to lower-tier CIPs. New subsections 28(2.1) and 28(14) would enable any upper-tier municipality to adopt a CIP would and restore previously existing CIPs of upper- tier municipalities that lost planning responsibilities, such as Durham Region. Yes Staff supports the reinstatement of upper-tier municipalities’ ability to adopt and implement CIPs and welcomes the opportunity to work with the Region of Durham in this capacity to support CIP programs and funding towards community development initiatives in Clarington. 4 34 Zoning By-laws (Minimum and Maximum Standards) Recently, the Protect Ontario by Building Faster and Smarter Act, 2025 (Bill 17) amended the Planning Act to allow as-of-right variances to minimum setback requirements within a prescribed percentage range (e.g. 10 percent) on urban residential lands. Currently, this as-of right variance only applies to setback requirements. Bill 60 proposes new subsections 34(1.3.1), (1.3.2) and (1.3.3) and that would enable the Minister of Municipal Affairs No Staff does not support additional as-of-right variances to zoning by-law requirements and has concerns about the cumulative impacts of permitting variances from neighbourhood specific development standards without a review process to consider context. Page 240 Attachment 1 to Report PDS-073-25 Comments on Bill 60 Item Number ERO/ORR Number Title of ERO/ORR Post Section Overview of Proposed Change Staff Supports Change? Staff Comments and Housing authority to enact regulations to allow additional variances from minimum and maximum zoning provisions to be permitted as-of-right, in accordance with prescribed performance standards (e.g. height) on specified lands (e.g. urban residential lands). Municipal zoning standards are established based on technical requirements and local characteristics, and levels of servicing. Each standard interacts with others to create a functional building lot. For example, lot coverage and hard surface considerations for stormwater management, and minimum functional space between walls of buildings on neighbouring properties (drainage, rear yard access etc.). Under the minor variance process, these area- or parcel-specific considerations are assessed to determine whether the requested variance is appropriate in that context. The Province is requested to pause on enacting regulations to allow as-right-variances from additional zoning standards until municipalities have an opportunity to work collaboratively with the Province to monitor local impacts of the previous amendment to allow as-of-right variances from minimum setbacks. 5 025-1182 Proposed Changes to the GO Transit Station Funding Act, (Schedule 4) Bill 60 proposes amendments to the GO Transit Station Funding Act, 2023 to provide municipalities with greater flexibility in determining when Transit Station Charges are to be paid. Under the proposed changes, municipalities may choose to collect the charge either at the time of permit issuance or at building occupancy for new residential developments near future GO Transit stations. These changes are consistent with recent amendments to the Development Charges Act, 1997 introduced through Bill 17, which similarly provide flexibility in the timing of development charge payments. Neutral Staff does not object to a change that would provide municipalities flexibility to determine the optimal time for the transit station charge to be paid based upon local context. 6 25- MMAH018 Changes to the Development Charges Act, 1997 to Enhance Standardization and Streamlining of the Development The proposed changes will increase transparency for the land costs associated with the DC rate and capital projects. This will be addressed through removing land from existing service area to a land specific service area, with no historical service level but limited to the needs in the next ten years. Local service policies, not currently a requirement, will be a requirement to ensure transparency on what is or is not a DC- eligible project. Yes Transparency of putting land costs into a separate service category will reduce questions from stakeholders. By not restricting land to the service history, it reflects the fact that land values increase over time and needs in the next ten years may exceed historical spends. Local service policies are already a part of Clarington’s DC process. Page 241 Attachment 1 to Report PDS-073-25 Comments on Bill 60 Item Number ERO/ORR Number Title of ERO/ORR Post Section Overview of Proposed Change Staff Supports Change? Staff Comments Charge (DC) Framework A proposal to require municipalities to provide the annual treasurer statements to Council by June 30 each year and to the Minister no later than July 15. Further, a proposed requirement to provide a copy of the DC background study and by-law to the Minister on request. The Municipality provides the Treasurer statement already prior to June 30, and the added requirement to provide copies to the Minister within the timeframes are manageable. 7 25- MMAH030 Implementing Reforms to the Development Charges Framework Proposal would merge water supply services and wastewater services for the purpose of DC credits. Proposal to make benefit to existing allocations more transparent in DC background studies. The proposal would require the DC background studies to include descriptions of the methodology used for benefit to existing calculations including assumptions. Proposal to require land costs to be in a new service class, see item 10. Proposal to make financial statements relating to DCs more transparent and easily accessible. This would include a requirement to identify the amount from each reserve fund that was committed to a project, but not yet spent, at the end of each year; the amount of debt that had been issued for a project; and identify where in the background study the capital costs were estimated. Not Applicable Yes Changes to water and wastewater service DCs are not applicable for the Municipality. Staff do not have an issue with providing the methodology. This provide stakeholders with additional information and provide for clarity on cost drivers. See comments for #10 above While this may require additional work in reporting, the process is already undertaken as part of annual reconciliations. Staff support changes that provide additional clarity and transparency which will reduce misinformation or concerns from stakeholders on the use of DC funds for growth purposes. Staff Comments on Consultation on Minimum Lot Sizes Comments on Consultation on Minimum Lot Sizes Item Number ERO/ORR Number Title of ERO/ORR Post Section Overview of Proposed Change Staff Supports Change? Staff Comments 1 025-1100 Consultation on Minimum Lot Sizes What are your thoughts on the benefits and/or risks associated with reducing or removing minimum lot size requirements in low-density urban residential areas to encourage gentle density, increase housing supply, broaden housing options and encourage home ownership? No Staff does not support reducing or removing minimum lot sizes or imposing standardized reductions to minimum lot size requirements in low density urban residential areas. Each municipality and neighbourhoods within urban areas have different characteristics and are equipped with varying levels of infrastructure, services, and amenities (stormwater management, transit service, nearby parkland etc.) that are considered when establishing minimum lot sizes and determining what needs to be accommodated on each urban residential lot. For example, smaller urban communities that are not serviced by transit, or in close proximity to parks or would require space for parking and private amenity area Page 242 Attachment 1 to Report PDS-073-25 Comments on Consultation on Minimum Lot Sizes Item Number ERO/ORR Number Title of ERO/ORR Post Section Overview of Proposed Change Staff Supports Change? Staff Comments as part of each lot, whereas a more urbanized city may not. A one size fits all lot size minimum across Ontario does not recognize the differences in service levels across municipalities, communities, and neighbourhoods. Municipalities should maintain autonomy to implement appropriate minimum lot sizes based on local context to ensure proper function of the site and neighbourhood. 2 Are there any circumstances where having established minimum lot sizes in municipal zoning by-laws for low-density urban residential parcels are absolutely necessary with respect to the provision of transportation, infrastructure, or upholding public health and safety? No In older neighbourhoods where servicing and stormwater management infrastructure may not be present or sufficient to support widespread changes to density, pervious surface, or drainage patterns. In areas that are not sufficiently serviced with efficient local and regional transit, thereby making it necessary to provide sufficient area on each lot for vehicle parking. It is also noted minimum lot and frontage requirements can help manage on street parking by maintaining sufficient distances between driveways to accommodate vehicles parking on streets where neighbourhoods have experienced gentle intensification through additional residential units. In areas that are subject to conservation under the Ontario Heritage Act, particularly where the lot fabric is identified as an attribute that contributes to the cultural heritage value or interest of the heritage resource. 3 Given the Ontario context and the government’s permissions for additional residential units, what do you suggest should be the smallest size urban residential lot in terms of lot area, frontage or depth (i.e.six metre frontage, 200 square metres area,etc.) What would be the opportunities and limitations? How would these standards work together? No The smallest sized urban residential lot, as specified by lot area, frontage, or depth depends on the municipality’s individual context (e.g. presence of natural heritage features, grades, level of servicing), and permitted built form. In order to ensure proper lot function, an urban residential lot for a single detached dwelling with an additional residential unit in the basement, and a residential unit in an accessory structure would require a different minimum lot area and frontage than a lot for a townhouse unit with or without an additional residential unit. Municipal zoning standards are established based on technical requirements, local characteristics, and levels Page 243 Attachment 1 to Report PDS-073-25 Comments on Consultation on Minimum Lot Sizes Item Number ERO/ORR Number Title of ERO/ORR Post Section Overview of Proposed Change Staff Supports Change? Staff Comments of servicing. Each minimum standard interacts with others to create a functional building lot. A one size fits all approach will make it challenging for municipalities to maintain proper lot and neighbourhood function. 4 What other zoning requirements or performance standards could be needed to support any reduction or removal of minimum lot size requirements on low-density urban residential parcels (i.e., additional residential units, multiplexes, parking requirements, lot coverage, height and density etc.)? Zoning standards including lot coverage maximums, opens space minimums, minimum setback requirements, parking requirements, height, among others, would be required to enable municipalities to ensure lots continue to be developed in a way that will function properly and appropriately both in the context of the lot itself, and the surrounding neighbourhood. Draft Staff Comments on Consultation on Enhanced Development Standards Comments on Consultation on Enhanced Development Standards Item Number ERO/ORR Number Title of ERO/ORR Post Section Overview of Proposed Change Staff Supports Change? Staff Comments 1 025-1101 Consultation on Enhanced Development Standards – Lot Level (outside of buildings) What is your interest in and/or experience with the implementation of enhanced development standards at the lot level (outside of buildings)? For example, are you a municipal staff member, homebuilder, planner, Indigenous representative, or member of the public? N/A Comments have been prepared by municipal planning staff. 2 In your experience, are enhanced development standards applied consistently across municipalities? Please provide examples where possible. N/A Enhanced development standards are not necessarily applied consistently across Ontario. However, each municipality uses development standards, and site plan control, as appropriate, to implement strategic policy directions, such as those relating to energy conservation, air quality, and climate change that are also consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement, 2024. 3 What types of standards, should municipalities be allowed to apply outside of buildings and how do these requirements maintain the health and safety of the site if at all? N/A Standards relating to accessibility, climate resiliency and sustainability, improving visibility and public safety within neighbourhoods, and low impact development measures that reduce strain on or complement conventional infrastructure should be among the types of standards municipalities are able to consider outside of buildings. Page 244 Attachment 2 to Report PDS-073-25 Attachment 2 to PDS-073-25 – DRAFT Staff Comments on Consultation on simplifying and standardizing official plans Item Number ERO/ORR Number Title of ERO/ORR Post Section Discussion Question Staff Supports Change? Staff Comments 1 025-1099 Consultation on simplifying and standardizing official plans Official Plan Structure and Contents What is your perspective on the changes being considered to simplify and standardize the structure and contents of official plans? Yes No Staff is open to considering opportunities to improve clarity and effectiveness of municipal official plans and finding efficiencies in official plan development and update processes. Staff is concerned about the extent to which standardization could undermine the purpose of a municipal official plan, which is to set out the long-term vision for how a community wants to grow, and to makes sure that growth is coordinated and meets the community’s needs. Staff does not support the standardization of official plans where standards are imposed that require each municipality’s official plan to look the same and provide for the development of a standardized built community. Staff also does not support the elimination of secondary plans as part of the official plan. Secondary plans enable a level of specificity in planning for land use, infrastructure, and amenities that is necessary to help guide the development of complete communities. 2 What distinctions should be made between the content of upper and lower-tier official plans? What considerations should apply in municipalities where the upper-tier official plan acts as the lower-tier official plan? N/A Clarington is part of the Regional Municipality of Durham, an upper-tier municipality without planning responsibilities. Clarington has assumed the Regional Official Plan and will be consolidating the upper-tier and lower-tier official plans into one document as part of the upcoming Official Plan review. 3 What is your perspective on limiting development standards in official plans? To what extent should development standards be set out in official plans vs in zoning by-laws? Neutral As part of the upcoming Official Plan review, staff is not opposed to a review of the contents to acknowledge where there may be prescriptive development standards that may be better directed to zoning by-laws (e.g. step backs, setbacks). The Province is requested to provide clarification as to what it considers a development standard. Many official plans began to incorporate prescriptive policies to conform to density and intensification requirements identified in the Growth Plan. 4 What is your perspective on the changes being considered regarding secondary plans and site- specific policies? Are there other ways to address these policies? No Staff agrees that municipalities should have a comprehensive official plan that applies to the entire municipality. Staff does not support eliminating the opportunity for municipalities to develop secondary plans or site-specific policies. Many municipalities are not homogenous and benefit from community or neighbourhood specific policies and secondary plans to address matters like infrastructure and community amenities that consider a sub area’s specific characteristics. Clarington, for example, is comprised of four distinct urban areas, and a large agricultural Page 245 Attachment 2 to Report PDS-073-25 Item Number ERO/ORR Number Title of ERO/ORR Post Section Discussion Question Staff Supports Change? Staff Comments and rural land mass, most of which is located within the Greenbelt. Secondary plans should remain part of official plans to enable more detailed, but necessary, comprehensive planning for land use, infrastructure, and amenities, in support of municipal capital forecasting at the neighbourhood or community scale. 5 What is your perspective on the number and types of standardized schedules, overlays and data proposed to be required? Should any be removed, or are there any other schedules that could help improve official plans? Neutral Many of the proposed standard schedules are already included in the Clarington Official Plan. However, two proposed new schedules, A1 Estimate of Market Need, A2 Serviced Land Requirement are not schedules staff are familiar with so more detail would be needed. In addition, during our last Official Plan review, the Province initially to added F1 Wildland Fire Susceptibility however eventually concluded that this type of data was not available for Clarington and therefor not applicable. Regarding B2 Wastewater and Stormwater; wastewater is the Region of Durham’s infrastructure and would therefore be inappropriate to map in the Clarington Official Plan. In the case of Stormwater, pond locations are only finalized at the end of the planning process, so early identification municipal wide at the OP scale is not appropriate. 6 Limiting the Length of Official Plans What is your perspective on the changes being considered to limit the length of official plans? No Staff does not support a page limit on the length of official plans. Official Plans should be developed, reviewed, and approved based on the value of the contents, not the length of the document. Each municipalit y’s composition, growth forecasts, and needs are different. Therefore, these considerations should be at the core of the development of the official plan, rather than losing valuable policy direction at the expense of an arbitrary page limit. 7 Should there be different limits placed on different types of municipalities (e.g., based on population size)? No Staff does not support a standardization of length based on types of municipalities. Currently, Ontario’s municipalities are unique, having different land areas, populations, natural features, agricultural systems, specific employment industries, levels of infrastructure etc. A municipality may have a small population but robust growth forecasts within the planning horizon, perhaps needing new policies to help guide this growth. Conversely, a largely populated municipality’s growth may be slowing. Official plans should be reflective of each unique municipality and be comprised of policies that appropriately add value. Length should not be the focus. 8 Are there other approaches that could be used to limit the length of official plans? Yes Staff suggests focusing improvements on the value of the content and consider how certain types of policies (e.g. prescriptive standards) may be better accommodated in other available tools. 9 Creating Permissive What is your perspective on the changes being considered to standardize the number and type of land use designations? Neutral Staff is not opposed some standardization of the naming convention for land use designations, provided municipalities retain the autonomy to define what each designation looks like in its local context, and where each designation Page 246 Attachment 2 to Report PDS-073-25 Item Number ERO/ORR Number Title of ERO/ORR Post Section Discussion Question Staff Supports Change? Staff Comments Land Use Designations No may or may not be appropriate. For example, medium - or high- density residential may look different in a largely populated, urbanized municipality than in a mid-sized municipality without supportive transit infrastructure. Staff would not support requirements that reduce municipalities’ ability to plan for and embrace what makes them unique, and the reasons residents and businesses might choose to locate there. 10 Would standardized land use designations between upper-tier and lower-tier official plan improve clarity? Where are the opportunities to reduce duplication between the upper and lower- tier official plans in land use designations? Neutral Clarington is part of the Regional Municipality of Durham, an upper-tier municipality without planning responsibilities. Clarington has assumed the Regional Official Plan and will be consolidating the upper-tier and lower tier official plans into one document as part of the new official plan review. 11 Are there additional designations that would be required? Are there opportunities to streamline or further combine some of the proposed designations (e.g. Residential I and II, and Mixed Use I and II)? N/A Rural/Countryside (including rural settlement areas) designations should be included. Employment designations that apply to lands outside of Employment Areas should also be included to ensure municipalities are able to appropriately plan for employment uses (such as population-related employment) and avoid development of residential-only communities. 12 Are there implications to making land use designations more streamlined and permissive? No More permissive and streamlined land use designations may make it more challenging to affect the function, look, and feel of both private and public spaces within neighbourhoods. Standardization puts at risk the individuality of each municipality. Public participation and community involvement has been an integral part of land use planning. Many of the changes to provincial legislation and policy over the last few years have made it increasingly challenging for the community to have a voice in shaping the places they have chosen to live, work, and play. Streamlining high level policy documents will further diminish the public’s ability to affect how their community grows. 13 Are there land use designation terminology or descriptions that would be easier to understand? Neutral The proposed standard designations seem common across municipal official plans currently, and familiar to those who are familiar with land use planning and development. The naming convention however, Residential 1 and Residential 2 is quite similar to R1 and R2 – standard residential zones throughout the province. 14 Transitioning to a New Framework What is your perspective on the changes being considered to transition to a standardized official plan framework? Yes No Staff would support transition provisions that require new official plans to conform to a new framework at the next scheduled five - or ten-year review. This would better enable municipalities to plan and budget for the update. Staff would oppose transition provisions where compliance is required by a specified date from the time a new framework comes into effect. This approach would lack regard for the timing of municipalities’ most recent Page 247 Attachment 2 to Report PDS-073-25 Item Number ERO/ORR Number Title of ERO/ORR Post Section Discussion Question Staff Supports Change? Staff Comments official plan review cycle and would put undue pressure on municipa l resources and budgets by requiring another update in advance of the five- year cycle. There would be similar pressure on external consultant resources, often retained to assist municipalities with reviews, if all municipalities were undertaking updates simultaneously to comply with the same deadline. 15 What is a realistic implementation timeline for your municipality to update its official plan to comply with a standardized framework (e.g., structure, land use designations, page/word limits), and why? Please consider staffing, council cycles, data/mapping updates, public engagement, and statutory review requirements in your response. N/A Staff will look to implement any new direction for official plan content as part of the upcoming official plan review, which will also consolidate the Clarington Official Plan and the Durham Regional Official Plan into one document, as directed by the Province. It is anticipated this program will take approximately two to five years to complete in consideration of the necessary background technical studies and council election cycles, and will result in the need for additional staff resources. In addition, staff will be looking to initiate a comprehensive zoning by-law review to dovetail with the Official Plan review program, enabling the relocation of prescriptive, development standard-type policies from the Official Plan into zoning to facilitate efficient development approvals. 16 How can the province best support municipalities in transitioning to a simplified and harmonized official plan framework? N/A The Province could support municipalities with additional resources to support Indigenous Engagement. As well, the Province could support municipalities by stabilizing the provincial framework to enable municipalities to implement these changes. 17 Submission of Official Plans through Online Portal Do you support the move toward allowing submission of official plan information and documents through an online portal? Why or why not? Support Staff is supportive of digital submission for official plans and official plan amendments that require approval by the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. Clarington has recently implemented electronic submission for all Planning Act applications. 18 What benefits and/or risks do you foresee from transitioning to submission through an online portal? Support Benefits to transitioning to submission through an online portal could include immediate acknowledgment of a record being received by the Province, and the ability to provide real-time status updates on documents that have been submitted to the Ministry for approval. Page 248 Staff Report If this information is required in an alternate accessible format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131. Report To: Planning and Development Committee Date of Meeting: December 8, 2025 Report Number: FSD-035-25 Authored By: Musawer Muhtaj, Senior Financial Analyst, Financial Planning Submitted By: Trevor Pinn, Deputy CAO/Treasurer, Finance and Technology Reviewed By: Mary-Anne Dempster, CAO By-law Number: Resolution Number: File Number: Report Subject: 2025 Development Charge Study and Community Benefits Charge Strategy Final Recommendations Recommendations: 1. That Report FSD-035-25, and any related delegations or communication items, be received; 2. That the March 24, 2025 Development Charge Background Study revisions mentioned in Attachment 1, be included in the development charge calculations; 3. That the final list of capital projects included in the 2025 Development Charge Background Study, provided in Attachment 5, be approved; 4. That the proposed Development Charge By-Law (Attachment 3), be amended to reflect the updated development charge rates outlined in Attachment 5; 5. That the proposed Development Charge By-law, be amended to reflect the following revisions: Remove the Special Properties exemption, within the Clarington Science Park or Clarington Energy Park, for industrial developments that are focused on conducting research. Reduce the general exemption for industrial expansions to apply only if the gross floor area is enlarged by 50 per cent or less (currently 100 per cent or less). Remove the 50 per cent DC exemption for new industrial buildings on vacant lots; Page 249 Municipality of Clarington Page 2 Report FSD-035-25 6. That the Municipality of Clarington Development Charges Background Study, dated March 24, 2025, completed in accordance with Section 10 of the Development Charges Act, 1997, and as modified by the above recommendation, be adopted, including the growth-related capital forecast, subject to an annual review through the Municipality’s normal capital budget process as well as the population and employment forecasts; 7. That the adoption of the growth-related capital forecast signifies Council’s intention to ensure that the increase in services attributable to growth will be met as by section 5(1)(3) of the Development Charges Act recognizing, however, that specific projects and project timing as contained in the study forecast may be revised from time to time at Council’s discretion. 8. That the final list of capital projects included in the 2025 Community Benefits Charge Strategy, provided in Attachment 5, be approved, subject to an annual review through the Municipality’s normal capital budget process; 9. That the proposed Community Benefits Charge By-law be amended to reflect the following revisions based on submissions from stakeholders (Attachment 2): Exclude enclosed rooftop mechanical equipment from the definition of “storey”. Update section 19 to say “the Municipality shall immediately refund the owner the difference between the amount paid and the 4% of the land value determined by the owner’s Appraisal”; 10. That the Municipality of Clarington Community Benefits Charge Strategy and By-law, dated March 24, 2025, as modified by the above recommendations, be adopted; 11. That no further public meetings under Section 12 of the Development Charges Act, 1997, are necessary with respect to the March 24, 2025, Development Charges Background Study, Community Benefits Strategy, and their respective By-laws for the reasons outlined in Report FSD-035-25; and 12. That all interested parties listed in Report FSD-035-25, and any delegations be advised of Council’s decision. Page 250 Municipality of Clarington Page 3 Report FSD-035-25 Report Overview The Municipality has completed work to update the Development Charges (DC) Background Study and corresponding by-law. As part of this process, staff reviewed and updated the 10- year growth-related capital program, along with population and employment growth projections. In addition to the DC Background Study, staff have developed the Municipality’s first Community Benefits Charge (CBC) Strategy and corresponding By-law. The CBC Strategy, inclusive of a 10-year growth related capital program, has been prepared in conjunction with the DC Background Study. The Municipality retained Hemson Consulting (Hemson) to update it’s DC Background Study and By-law, as well as to prepare the CBC Strategy and corresponding By-law. Upon Council approval, the new DC and CBC By-laws will come into effect on December 15, 2025. 1. Background 1.1 Development Charges (DCs) are an important cost recovery mecha nism used by municipalities to aid in financing essential growth-related infrastructure. In the absence of DCs, the financial responsibility of growth-related infrastructure would be pushed onto the general tax levy. Under the Development Charges (DC) Act, 1997, c. 27, s. 2(1): “A municipality may impose development charges by by-law to cover capital costs arising from increased service needs due to area development.” 1.2 The Municipality’s existing DC By-law will expire on January 19, 2026. Thus, to maintain the ability to collect development charges and fund growth-related infrastructure, a new DC By-law must be passed before the date of expiry. 1.3 Hemson Consulting has been retained to update the current DC Background Study and associated By-law. After holding two separate consultation sessions with the development industry in the early part of 2025, a draft of the 2025 DC Background Study, and DC Draft By-law were released to the public on March 24, 2025. 1.4 In accordance with the requirements of the Development Charges Act, a statutory public meeting was held on April 7, 2025, allowing the public and development industry to comment. Several submissions were received from the industry after the meeting. Staff and Hemson Consulting have reviewed the submissions and provided a coordinated response to the questions/comments that were raised. 1.5 In Q4 2025, the development industry was provided another opportunity to review and comment on the DC Background Study and CBC Strategy. Staff and Hemson Consulting have responded to submissions received as of November 25, 2025. Page 251 Municipality of Clarington Page 4 Report FSD-035-25 1.6 This report provides a summary of revisions/amendments made to the DC Background Study, and respective By-law released on March 24, 2025, resulting from the ongoing public engagement. 1.7 Clarington is expected to see significant growth over the next few years, which requires a significant amount of growth-related infrastructure. This being the case, it is important that DCs are utilized to their greatest extent possible. 2. Correspondence from Developers 2.1 Since the public release of the DC background study and CBC strategy staff received several submissions from the development industry, which staff, and Hemson Consulting provided responses to in writing. 2.2 As a result of the submissions, slight adjustments have been made to existing DC projects (e.g. increasing/ decreasing road boundaries, etc.) while some projects have been added and others removed. These changes are highlighted through the responses in Attachment 2 and reflected in the updated capital program provided in Attachment 5. 2.3 Updated DC rates resulting from the changes implemented since the release of the background study are provided in Attachment 5. A summary is also provided in Table 4 below. 2.4 No changes are proposed to the current proposed CBC rate of 4% of the land value of a development the day before the first building permit is issued. 3. Legislative Changes 3.1 There have been many legislative changes to DCs in recent years. Bill 108 introduced policies under sections 26.1 and 26.2 of the Development Charge s Act (DCA) for installment payments and DC freezes on eligible developments. In November 2022, Bill 23 added exemptions for non-profit housing, additional units in rental housing, residential intensification, and inclusionary zoning (must be affordable). The bill also introduced rental housing discounts based on the number of bedrooms. 3.2 Bill 23 also included a mandatory five-year phase-in of fully calculated DC rates; however, this provision has since been repealed, and municipalities are again able to charge 100 per cent of the fully calculated rate upon the passage of their DC by-law. 3.3 Further exemptions for affordable housing units were also included in Bill 23 but have only come into force as of June 2024. To receive the affordable housing exemption, developers must enter into a 25-year agreement with the Municipality that ensures the development remains affordable for the entire length of the agreement. Affordability thresholds are defined through the provincial “Affordable Residential Units for the Purposes of the Development Charges Act, 1997 Bulletin”. 3.4 Currently, the threshold for affordable ownership units in Clarington is $480,400. This applies to all unit types (e.g. single detached, semi detached, apartments, etc.) and is Page 252 Municipality of Clarington Page 5 Report FSD-035-25 based on average gross annual incomes. The monthly rent threshold for affordable rental apartment units ranges from $1,273 per month for a bachelor unit to $1,827 per month for a 3-bedroom or greater apartment. Housing units must be bought or rented at levels at or below these thresholds to receive the DC exemption. These thresholds will be reviewed and reassessed annually by the Provincial Government. 3.5 The maximum life of the DC By-law has also been extended from 5-years to 10-years. 3.6 Furthermore, Bill 17 changes the Building Code Act to clarify that municipalities do not have the authority to create or enforce their own construction or demolition standards. 3.7 Bill 17 resulted in changes to the Development Charges Act including: 3.7.1. Exemptions for long-term care homes (LTC), as defined in the Fixing Long-Term Care Home Act, 2021 from development charges. 3.7.2. Streamlines the process for municipalities to change DC By-laws if the amendment is to remove or extend an expiration date of the by-law; repeal a provision providing for indexing or to amend a provision so as to have the DC not be indexed, or; decrease the amount of a DC that is payable for one or more types of development in the circumstances specified in the amendment. 3.7.3. Allows a municipality to charge interest on the instalments only to the extent that it has accrued prior to the passing of the legislation. Deferral of DCs will no longer be charged interest. 3.7.4. Freezes DCs at the time of application for any developments proceeding through a zoning by-law amendment or a site plan approval. Rates remain frozen until occupancy, assuming the planning application is approved within 18 months. Bill 17 proposes that the DC payable at occupancy will now be the lower of the frozen DC amount (plus any applicable interest) or the DC rate in effect at the time of payment. 3.7.5. Adds residential development other than rental housing development as a type of development where the DCs are paid at occupancy rather than building permit. Clarity was also made to allow a party to pay the DCs before it is payable, in the absence of an agreement under section 27. It is presumed that the early payment would be required at building permit issuance, but the legislation does not specify. 3.8 Additional changes proposed by Bill 17 to the Development Charges Act, which have not yet been enacted or prescribed through the regulations, include: 3.8.1. Expands Province’s authority to limit any eligible DC capital costs through regulation and grants the Minister authority to define local services, currently defined by municipalities. 3.8.2. Provides provincial authority to standardize the definition of Benefit to Existing (BTE) and to standardize DC background studies. Page 253 Municipality of Clarington Page 6 Report FSD-035-25 3.9 Bill 17 made numerous amendments to the Planning Act and proposes changes to multiple Acts relating to provincial transit matters, including the Building Transit Faster Act, 2020, the Metrolinx Act, 2006, the Transit Oriented Communities Act, 2020, and the Ministry of Infrastructure Act, 2011. 3.10 Most recently, Bill 60 proposes four key amendments to the DCA that would take effect upon receiving Royal Assent, these are: 3.10.1. Introduces a new “class of service” under section 7 of the DCA for land acquisition costs, where the inclusion of land acquisition costs is limited to a 10- year period, except for engineering services (water, wastewater, stormwater, roads, electricity), protection services (fire and police), and transit. 3.10.2. Mandates municipalities to adopt a local services policy for each service included in their DC by-law that has any component delivered as a local service. Each local services policy must identify the works or classes of works that are considered a local service. 3.10.3. Requires a municipal treasurer to give a DC financial statement to Council each year on or before June 30 and to the Minister no later than the following July 15. 3.10.4. Requires municipal Councils to provide the DC Background Study, and/or the DC by-law, and/or the local service policy to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing upon request, within the timeframe specified by the Minister. 3.11 Given the dynamic legislative environment, the draft DC By-law makes reference to the legislation for exemptions and discounts. This approach allows the Municipality to adapt more efficiently to legislative changes, avoiding administrative confusion and potentially the time and cost of reopening the DC By-law. 4. Analysis Growth Forecast 4.1 A high-level summary of the 10-year population, household, and employment forecast used to calculate the DC rates is presented in Table 1. The forecast was prepared by Hemson, in consultation with the Planning and Infrastructure Department. Additional details are provided in Appendix A of the DC Background Study. Page 254 Municipality of Clarington Page 7 Report FSD-035-25 Table 1: Summary of 10-year Development Forecast 109,379 38,265 33,376 135,536 49,905 42,670 Source: Hemson Consulting Ltd., based on Durham Regional Official Plan, p.40 DC Capital Program 4.2 The 10-year DC capital program is included in Attachment 5. The capital program represents a forecast of the growth-related infrastructure required to service growth over the next ten years (2025-2034). The forecast considers the recommendations within the Parks, Recreation, and Culture Master Plan, along with the infrastructure required to service the various secondary plan areas. Additionally, the Municipality has committed to a housing target of 13,000 new units by 2031, necessitating substantial capital investments to service expansion areas. 4.3 Table 2 provides a high-level summary of the capital program, which totals $907.80 million in gross capital costs over 10-years. Hemson has reviewed the plan in detail and has considered existing DC reserve fund balances, determined the portions that relate to post-period development (beyond 2034) as well as the benefit to existing (the portion that existing residents benefit from). Table 2: Summary of 10-year DC Capital Program ($millions) – $46.12 $12.91 $1.96 $16.24 $15.01 $23.61 $1.52 $5.37 $10.16 $6.56 $328.99 $5.19 $4.62 $145.69 $173.49 $10.50 $2.16 $0.38 $6.98 $0.97 $498.58 $45.32 $37.25 $341.99 $74.02 100% 7% 5% 58% 30% 4.4 A significant driver of capital costs are the inflationary pressures experienced over the past couple of years. Table 3 below highlights the annual increases in non -residential building construction over the past few years. Page 255 Municipality of Clarington Page 8 Report FSD-035-25 Table 3: Historical Non-residential Building Construction Price Index (Q3 Annual) 3.3% 2.5% 11.7% 15.6% 7.4% 3.3% 4.5 The non-residential construction price index is also the prescribed index for the annual indexing of DC rates. DC rates are indexed annually to account for annual inflationary increases. Capital costs included in the 2025 DC Background Study are shown in $2025. DC Rates 4.6 The proposed DC rates are provided in Attachment 5. The rates reflect the maximum permissible rates calculated under the DCA. Council may choose to implement a lower rate, but it will result in a loss of DC revenues which the Municipality must fund from other sources (such as tax levy). 4.7 The rates represent an increase over the current rates, as shown in the table below. This is attributable to many factors, including inflation, updates to the development forecast, inclusion of new Secondary Plan Areas, new Master Plans, and a fulsome capital program update by staff and consultants. Table 4: Summary of DC Rates $31,645 $43,488 $11,843 37% $25,936 $35,699 $9,763 38% $16,847 $20,975 $4,128 25% $10,342 $14,594 $4,252 41% $158.23 $208.92 $50.69 32% $55.24 $95.39 $40.15 73% 4.8 The above represents the maximum permissible rates calculated under the legislative requirements of the Development Charges Act. Page 256 Municipality of Clarington Page 9 Report FSD-035-25 Council should be aware that there could be undesirable consequences for not increasing the rates to the extent required. For example, if rates are not adjusted to reflect the realities of the costs of growth, it will mean that either key servicing requirements will not be met, inhibiting growth, and potentially preventing the Municipality from meeting its housing pledge, or it will mean that the costs will shift to the taxpayers and rate payers to finance these growth-related costs. 5. Area Specific DC – Clarington Technology Park 5.1 In addition to the municipal-wide DC By-law, the Municipality also has an area specific DC By-law that pertains to stormwater management services within the Clarington Technology Park area. Staff are not proposing any changes t o the By-law at this time and propose an amendment to extend the current life of the By-law for an additional five-years, as the life of DC By-laws has been extended to 10-years under the requirements of the Development Charges Act. 6. Revisions to the DC By-Law 6.1 The proposed DC By-law, released as part of the DC Background Study on March 24, 2025, included several updates to the current by-law (2021-010). Many of the changes are required to ensure the by-law conforms with current legislation. Staff have proposed some minor changes to definitions to provide better clarity or to align with definitions in the Region of Durham’s DC by-law, where possible. 6.2 In addition to the changes outlined above, staff are proposing three additional changes regarding various exemptions and discounts. Attachment 3 includes the proposed new DC by-law. Specific Properties Exemption 6.3 Section 23 of the current DC by-law (2021-010) includes the following exemption for specific properties: “Buildings that are or will be located either in the Clarington Science Park or the Clarington Energy Park are exempt from development charges if the owner can provide evidence satisfactory to the Director of Finance that the building will be used for research purposes including laboratories, offices, amenity areas and service areas for staff who conduct research.” 6.4 Staff have traced this exemption back to at least the 2010 by-law. This appears to be a legacy exemption that has been carried forward through subsequent by-laws. 6.5 Staff have reviewed this exemption, and it does not appear to have any reference to either secondary plan, nor does staff have any record of this exemption ever being used. 6.6 This exemption has been removed from the proposed by-law. Page 257 Municipality of Clarington Page 10 Report FSD-035-25 Industrial Expansion Exemption 6.7 Section 30(3) of the current DC by-law, regarding existing industrial development, includes the following exemption: “If the gross floor area is enlarged by 100 per cent or less, the amount of the development charge in respect of the enlargement is zero.” 6.8 The DCA provides a statutory exemption for industrial expansions if the gross floor area is enlarged by 50 per cent or less. The exemption provided in the Municipality’s current DC by-law goes above and beyond the DCA by providing exemptions up to 100 per cent of the current gross floor area. 6.9 As the additional 50 per cent to the statutory exemption is discretionary, the Municipality is required to reimburse the DC reserve funds for the cost of any industrial expansion between 51 and 100 per cent of the current gross floor. A reimbursement is funds flowing from the tax-levy to the DC reserve funds. 6.10 In 2024, all industrial expansions were within the 50 per cent statutory threshold; therefore, no reimbursements to the DC reserve funds were required. No reimbursements have been issued under this exemption for the past five years, suggesting all recent industrial expansions have been within the legislated exemption. 6.11 This exemption has been reduced to 50 per cent in the proposed DC by-law to align with the legislative requirements in the DCA. New Industrial Expansions 6.12 Section 31 of the current DC by-law (2021-010) includes the following exemption for new industrial developments: “The amount of the development charge payable in respect of a new industrial building constructed on a vacant lot is 50 per cent of the amount that would otherwise be payable.” 6.13 This exemption represents a discretionary exemption that is not required under the DCA. As a discretionary exemption, the Municipality is required to reimburse the cost of this exemption to the DC reserve funds. In 2024, this cost amounted to over $120,000. 6.14 As part of the by-law review process, Hemson conducted a scan of other local municipalities and did not find evidence of a similar exemption for new industrial buildings in any other jurisdiction within Durham Region. 6.15 This exemption has been removed from the proposed by-law to align with other jurisdictions within Durham Region. Page 258 Municipality of Clarington Page 11 Report FSD-035-25 7. Community Benefits Charge Background 7.1 In addition to the updated DC Background Study and By-law, staff are proposing the implementation of a Community Benefits Charge (CBC) as an additional mechanism for recovering the costs associated with growth. CBCs were introduced to replace the density bonusing provisions within the Planning Act and allow municipalities to secure payments from developers for “community benefits”. 7.2 CBCs are like DCs in that they represent a charge to developers to recover the cost of new infrastructure required by growth. However, CBCs are more restrictive in terms of how they can be implemented. CBCs can only be implemented by single or lower -tier municipalities, and the charges can only be imposed on buildings of 5 or more storeys that contain 10 or more residential units — effectively high-density developments. 7.3 The Municipality has worked with Hemson Consulting to develop a CBC Strategy and corresponding By-law of which a draft was released on March 24, 2025. 7.4 In conjunction with the DC Background Study, the municipality also received public feedback on the CBC Strategy and By-law after the statutory public meeting on April 7, 2025, to which staff and Hemson Consulting have responded. 7.5 As a result of the public feedback, some revisions have been made to the CBC Strategy and By-law which are highlighted in this report. Capital Program 7.6 CBCs can be used to fund a broad range of growth -related capital costs. They can be used to fund services and projects that receive development charge funding and can even be used to “top up” funding for such works where limits on development charges are in place (e.g. service level caps or DC-ineligible services, such as parking). Similarly, CBCs can also overlap with contributions made by developers under Section 42 of the Planning Act to secure parkland and other public recreation amenities. Provided they are used to fund costs that are not also funded from DCs and parkland contributions—no “double dipping” is allowed—the scope of the CBCs is potentially quite broad. 7.7 Attachment 5 provides the 10-year CBC capital program. The capital program includes a wide range of service areas, including provisions for climate action items and affordable housing. Table 5 provides a summarized list of the CBC capital program. The CBC eligible shares for 2025 – 2034 assume a high growth scenario of CBC eligible developments over the 10-year planning horizon. Scenario testing of low, medium and high growth scenarios will be discussed in the 2025 CBC Strategy. Page 259 Municipality of Clarington Page 12 Report FSD-035-25 Table 5: Summary of 10-year CBC Capital Program – $0.50 $0.00 $0.00 $0.48 $0.02 $0.20 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.20 $2.80 $0.33 $0.00 $2.34 $0.14 $0.60 $0.21 $0.00 $0.36 $0.02 $8.00 $2.00 $0.00 $5.74 $0.26 $2.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1.89 $0.11 $59.06 $0.00 $0.00 $55.74 $3.32 $2.58 $0.00 $0.00 $2.43 $0.14 100% 3% 0% 91% 6% 7.8 Upon finalizing the CBC capital program, Council will be asked to provide direction to staff on the prioritization of projects in the CBC Strategy. Cost recovery from a CBC will be significantly less than the cost recovery received from DCs. Therefore, staff will seek direction from Council on how to allocate the limited funding received between projects in the CBC capital program. 8. Revisions to the CBC By-Law 8.1 The proposed CBC by-law, released as part of the CBC strategy on March 24, 2025, has since had the following two changes based on submissions from the development industry. 8.2 Excluded enclosed rooftop mechanical equipment from the def inition of “storey”. Page 260 Municipality of Clarington Page 13 Report FSD-035-25 8.3 Updated section 19 to say, “the Municipality shall immediately refund the owner the difference between the amount paid and the 4% of the land value determined by the owner’s Appraisal”. 9. Next Steps 9.1 It is anticipated that the new DC and CBC By-laws will be approved by Council on December 15, 2025, whereafter a notice of By-law passage will be posted on Clarington’s DC/CBC webpage. 9.2 The new DC and CBC rates will take effect on December 15, 2025, ensuring it takes effect before the current DC By-law expires. This timeline ensures the Municipality can continue collecting DCs to support growth. 9.3 The appeal period for both By-laws will begin on December 15, 2025, and will end 40 days from this date, on January 26, 2026, after which appeals can no longer be made. 9.4 A pamphlet will be made available to all interested parties within 60 days of the passage of the DC By-law. 10. Financial Considerations 10.1 Most projects within the DC and CBC capital programs are intended to be funded, to the extent possible, through DCs or CBCs. Certain projects may have components that are ineligible for DC/CBC funding (i.e. benefit to existing shares), in which case these portions would need to be funded through non -DC sources. 10.2 Any projects from the DC/CBC capital programs that wish to proceed will be brought forward through the annual capital budget process for funding approval. Any non - DC/CBC eligible costs will also be addressed though the annual budget process. 10.3 DCs and CBCs are used to fund only the capital portion of gro w-related infrastructure. Although the use of DCs and CBCs does not inherently create an operational impact, net new assets will create associated expenses to properly maintain, manage, and eventually replace assets. Any operating impacts resulting from DC/CBC capital projects will be addressed through the annual budget update process. 11. Strategic Plan 11.1 The DC Background Study and CBC strategy outlined in this report is consistent with the following strategic priorities outlined in Clarington’s Strategic Plan 2024-2027. L.2.1: Implement a multi-year budget to promote effective long-term fiscal management, L.2.5: Maintain, protect and invest in municipal infrastructure and assets, L.3.2: Identify, establish and report on service levels of interest to the community, and Page 261 Municipality of Clarington Page 14 Report FSD-035-25 L.4.2: Proactively communicate with residents about the planning process and how we are responsibly addressing growth. 12. Climate Change Not Applicable. 13. Concurrence This report has been reviewed by the Deputy CAO, Planning and Infrastructure and the Deputy CAO, Public Services, both of whom concur with the recommendations. 14. Conclusion It is respectfully recommended that Council approve the 2025 Development Charge Background Study and By-Law, along with the Community Benefits Charge Strategy and associated By-Law, for implementation on December 15, 2025. Staff Contact: Musawer Muhtaj, Senior Financial Analyst, Financial Planning, mmuhtaj@clarington.net. Attachments: Attachment 1 – Clarington DC Study Developer Submissions and Staff Responses Attachment 2 – Clarington CBC Strategy Developer Submissions and Staff Responses Attachment 3 – Clarington’s Proposed DC By-Law Attachment 4 – Clarington’s Proposed CBC By-Law Attachment 5 – Clarington’s DC & CBC Capital Programs and DC Rates Interested Parties: There are no interested parties to be notified of Council's decision. Page 262 Hemson Consulting Ltd 1000 ‒ 30 St. Patrick Street, Toronto, ON M5T 3A3 416-593-5090 | hemson@hemson.com | www.hemson.com MEMORANDUM Municipality of Clarington Hemson Consulting June 20, 2025 Submission Responses ‒ Municipality of Clarington 2025 DC Background Study This memorandum responds to questions raised following the release of the Municipality of Clarington’s 2025 Development Charge (DC) Background Study dated March 24, 2025. The Municipality of Clarington received submissions from the following stakeholders: Building Industry and Land Development Association (BILD) in partnership with Durham Region Home Builders’ Association (DRHBA) dated April 25, 2025, Brookfield dated April 25, 2025, Schaeffers Consulting Engineers regarding 933 Mearns Ave. dated April 24, 2025, Schaeffers Consulting Engineers on behalf of Bowmanville North (Soper Springs) Landowners Group dated April 25, 2025, SCS Consulting Group dated May 2, 2025, Tribute Communities dated April 1, 2025, and Weston Consulting dated April 4, 2025. Hemson and Municipal staff have continued to review the assumptions and calculations since the release of the DC Background Study in March, resulting in changes to the rate calculations. Specifically, changes have been made to the Library, Emergency & Fire Services, Parks & Recreation, General Government, and Roads & Related capital programs, the revisions are shown in Attachment 1. In addition to these changes, minor modifications have been made to the Local Service Guidelines (LSG) to clarify the treatment of recreation trails. A copy of the revised LSG is provided in Attachment 2. This memorandum concludes with a summary of the changes in the development charge rates as presented in the DC Background Study dated March 24, 2025. Attachment 3 provides the unit rate breakdowns for the Roads and Related project types included in the Attachment 1 to Report FSD-035-25 Page 263 2 DC Background Study. Attachment 4 provides maps of the Municipality’s parks projects in Courtice, Newcastle, and Bowmanville. A.BILD SUBMISSION RESPONSE i.Population, Household and Employment Forecasts 1.The population and employment forecasts provided in the preliminary DC materials appear to be back-loaded such that the post-2035 forecasts are 50-69% higher on an annual basis than the forecasts in the first 10 years. This implies that the Municipality’s capital forecast (for those services extending beyond a 10-year forecast period) should be equally backloaded to ensure that the capital costs in the ‘numerator’ match the growth forecast in the ‘denominator’. Response: As stated in our letter dated, April 1, 2025; The services contained in the DC Background Study are all based on a 10-year planning horizon. The infrastructure included in the capital program is needed to meet the increase in need for servicing arising from development over the planning horizon. There are no services which extend beyond the 10-year planning horizon. ii.Library 2.Based on the response provided, the $40.4 million in capital costs for additional library space includes 20,000 SF in Bowmanville, 10,200 SF in Courtice and 2,100 SF in Newcastle. Given that the PRC Master Plan identified an existing need for library space in Bowmanville and Courtice, the DC Study appears to not fully reflect the extent to which the planned projects would benefit existing development. Response: Following the release of the DC Background Study dated March 24, 2025, a BTE allocation of 32% has been applied to the future library space. This allocation Page 264 3 recognizes that investments in future library space will be required in order for the existing population to achieve the standard of 0.55 square feet per capita. iii.Indoor Recreation 3.The values in the LOS for both the Kendal Community Centre Parking Lot increases by 1.0 hectares each year from 2014 (0.25 hectares) to 2024 (10.25 hectares). The same issue is evident for the Orono Arena & Community Hall Parking Lot, which increases from 0.22 hectares in 2014 to 10.22 hectares in 2024. These values are seen on page 111 of the 2025 DC Study. This appears to be a spreadsheet error that requires correction. Response: The historical inventory has been adjusted to reflect 0.25 hectares and 0.22 hectares from 2010 ‒ 2024 for Kendal Community Centre Parking Lot and Orono Arena & Community Hall Parking Lot, respectively. iv.Park development 4.The approach taken to BTE in the Parks & Recreation DC results in any “net new facilities” receiving 0% BTE, despite the PRC Master Plan indicating that there is an existing deficiency in certain service areas that the ‘net new’ facilities will also help address, in existing to meeting the anticipated needs of growth. For example, for splash pads, Clarington provides 16 facilities equating to a service level of 1 per 945 children. At the target service level of 1 per 700, the Municipality would need to provide 22 facilities, meaning that 6 facilities in the capital plan would be to bring the existing community’s service levels up to Municipal standards. The BTE applied to each project should reflect the extent to which the works would address existing deficiencies in service. Response: The BTE share for the 14 Outdoor Splash Pads has been updated from 0% to 39% based on 5.5 of the 14 new splash pads being required for the existing population to meet the service standard of one splash pad per 700 children as outlined in the PRCMP. v.Roads 5.The railroad crossing improvements (projects 38-40) are all assigned 0% BTE, despite upgrading existing at-grade crossings at Bennett, Arthur St. and Prestonvale Road. Page 265 4 The Municipality’s response to a question seeking data related to existing traffic and an estimate of what future traffic along these crossings will be was not responded to. The response received did note that these works are “minor safety improvements of existing rail grade separations”, but that they are ‘required in response to growth’ – regardless of the triggering event for the project, the DC Act requires that for projects needed by growth that a deduction for existing benefit be made to reflect the extent to which existing residents will receive a benefit. Response: These projects are now projects 36 ‒ 38 in the DC Background Study. In our opinion, the minor safety improvements of existing rail grade separations are related to meeting the increase in need for servicing arising from development and therefore have a 0% BTE. Existing residents will use new assets but recognizing that the infrastructure is required to meet the servicing needs of future development, in our opinion, a benefit to existing share would not be reasonable. 6. The request for details regarding what is included in the underlying unit costs for road works was not responded to in the detail sought: a) The Rural to Urban Collector road works largely have a per km unit cost of $6.4 million per km. b) Two of the Semi-Urban to Urban Collector projects have costs of $6.1 million per km c) The Reconstruct Rural Road to Regional Standard have an average cost of approximately $5.0 million per km To clarify the request, can detailed breakdowns of what comprises the unit cost for separate per KM cost be provided, including: Land costs Components of the road ROW (asphalt, curbs) Storm sewer works Sidewalks, streetlighting Landscaping Assumed adjustments to base costs for engineering and admin costs Contingency factors, etc. Response: The unit rate breakdowns for the Roads and Related project types included in the DC Background Study are provided in the benchmark summary found in Attachment 3 (in Excel). Page 266 5 7. The BTE of 0-10% for “Reconstruct Rural Road to Regional Standard” has not been justified such that it does not reflect the extent to which the existing community will benefit from the upgrading of roads that may be necessitated by growth, but which will provide ample benefit to existing road users, particularly so given that no new travel lands will be added to create capacity for new growth. Response: As stated in our letter dated, April 1, 2025; A 10% BTE has been applied to all projects in the “Reconstruct Rural Road to Regional Standard” category. 10% BTE share calculated based on the length of the existing road segment and the cost to maintain the asset over the planning horizon (new overlays often referred to as a “shave and pave” which includes minor base repairs, catch basin works, and curb repairs) using an assumption of $500/metre. In the absence of growth occurring, the Municipality would not be required to upgrade these roads to a Regional Standard. In addition to our response above, the existing residents will not benefit from the upgrading of the roads because traffic is expected to increase across the Municipality, even with additional investments in the roads network. While the proposed road upgrades will help improve safety, operations, and provide additional capacity to accommodate growth, these improvements will not fully address the increased travel demand with future development. Over time, the Municipality is likely to see increased traffic volumes, which would lead to congestion or operational constraints as new development occurs. 8. Projects 172 to 185 are for Streetscaping and have a 50% BTE assigned to them. To what extent do these streetscaping works meet increased needs for service attributable to new growth? Response: Noting that these projects are now projects 171 ‒ 184. As stated in our letter dated, April 1, 2025; The need for streetscaping improvements is driven, in part, by future growth occurring within the Municipality. Streetscaping create functional public spaces that supports a range of activities (cycling, walking, driving, etc.) while also enhancing public safety (an important requirement as the Municipality continues to grow) and supporting economic activity. Page 267 6 In addition to our response above, the 50% BTE allocation recognizes that the streetscaping works will benefit existing residents and employees in addition to the needs arising from future growth over the 10-year planning period. B. BROOKFIELD SUBMISSION RESPONSE i. Appendix C, Table 2 1. Project 73 – Concession 3 Urbanization a. Please confirm if the project cost includes for the MUP proposed on the south side of the roadway per the most recent Schedule A prepared for the North Village Secondary Plan. If a MUP is not included in the urbanization, a separate project for this item should be added to the “Active Transportation Infrastructure” section of the Table. Response: This project is now Project #71 in the DC Background Study. Yes, the proposed MUP is considered to be part of the right-of-way requirements for an arterial road. The project costs are included in-period in the DC rate calculation. b. Please confirm the timing for the urbanization work. This project may need to be brought forward to align with Secondary Plan buildout. Response: This project is now Project #71 in the DC Background Study and is anticipated to be entirely in-period from 2031 ‒ 2034. Noting that the project timing is based on information available at the time of preparing the DC Background Study. 2. Projects 77 & 78 – Arthur Street Urbanization a. Please confirm if the project cost includes for the MUP proposed on the west side of the roadway per the most recent Schedule A prepared for the North Village Secondary Plan. Response: These projects are now Project #75 and #76. Yes, the project costs include the MUP proposed. b. Please confirm if any sidewalks or streetlighting within these sections are included in the urbanization. If these are not included, separate projects for these items should be added to the appropriate sections of the table. Response: Yes, the project costs include sidewalks and streetlighting. Page 268 7 3. Project 125 – RR17 Sidewalk East Side: The approved drawings for RR17 works fronting Brookfield’s Draft Approved lands includes for a MUP on the east side of RR17, whereas the project description refers to a sidewalk. The description and cost estimate for this project should be updated, and the project should move to the “Active Transportation Infrastructure” section. Response: The project number is now #135, the project name and cost have been updated to include the MUP. 4. Request for Additional Projects to be Added a. The most recent Schedule A prepared for the North Village Secondary Plan (ongoing) includes a MUP along the east side of Hwy 35/115. This project should be added to the “Active Transportation Infrastructure” section of the table. Response: This project is not in the Municipality’s Official Plan and is considered a developer responsibility in accordance with the LSG. b. Given Clarington’s preference for a roundabout at RR17 and Concession 3 EA for the Secondary Plan, we believe a specific project should be included for this intersection. Response: This project is considered to be a Region controlled intersection and is a result of the Region’s EA. This project is a result of growth and is the responsibility of the Region. Thus, it is not included in the Municipality’s DC Background Study. 5. Benefit to Existing Calculations: There appear to be differing BTE percentages for sidewalks, MUPs, street lighting, and urbanization projects. It is expected that as roadway urbanization aggregates the improvements and costs, the apportionment between BTE and DC Eligible costs are different. Please provide clarification on how the BTE for the urbanization projects are calculated, particularly as it relates to projects 73, 77, and 78. Response: Noting that projects are now 77, 80 and 81. All active transportation (cycling) projects have a 10% BTE share applied (note: the 2020 DC Background Study applied a 0% BTE these projects). The BTE shares for sidewalks range from 0%, 25%, 50% or 80% based on the location throughout the Municipality and recognizing, in some cases, these projects have a more localized benefit. Net new sidewalks in future Page 269 8 development areas have a 0% BTE, where 25%, 50% or 80% BTE is applied based on development potential. ii. Appendix B.3, Table 2 6. Parks Project 3.7.1 – North Newcastle Neighbourhood Park a. Please confirm the location of this park, and whether it is in the North Village Secondary Plan or in DG’s draft approved lands to the South. This project has a project cost of $650,000 which seems light for a Secondary Plan Neighbourhood park but does not include a municipal contribution for the park on DG’s lands. Response: This park is in the Smooth Run Subdivision. The Developer is responsible for funding and constructing the park, whereas the Municipality of Clarington is responsible for funding the splash pad. b. The North Village Secondary Plan includes for one Neighbourhood Park and four Parkettes, which do not appear to be included in the DCBS. Response: The timing of the neighbourhood park and four parkettes are beyond the 10-year planning horizon and therefore are not included in the current DC Background Study. These projects will be considered for DC funding as part of future updates when the planning horizon is adjusted. C. SCHAEFFERS (MEARNS AVE.) SUBMISSION RESPONSE i. Appendix C Table 2 – Road Infrastructure ii. Intersection Works 1. Please add an intersection project proposed on Mearns Ave at Freeland Avenue (between Concession Road 3 and Longworth Ave), to include for the proposed east leg of this future 4-legged intersection, including illumination and line painting. The intersection will serve the majority of the proposed development north of Hanna Drive. Response: The intersection proposed on Mearns Ave at Freeland Avenue is a direct result of the development and is therefore a local service in accordance with the LSG. Page 270 9 iii. Roadworks – Rural Upgrade 2. We request that DC Project 76, Lambs Road (CPR tracks to Concession Rd 3), include for the future west leg of the proposed intersection to be constructed on Lambs Road approximately 200m south of Conc Road 3, including intersection illumination. Response: The project is now #77 in the revised roads capital program. The future west leg of the proposed intersection and intersection illumination is considered to be a local service requirement and is therefore not included in the project costs. 3. Please ensure that the scope of DC Project 79 on Concession Road 3 (Mearns Ave to Reg Rd 42), will include for the ultimate arterial road culvert required at the creek crossing to support growth lands north and south of Concession Road 3. [To note that on Table 3-2 of the Soper Springs Functional Servicing Report (FSR) dated November 2024, prepared by Tylin Group for the Municipality, the existing culvert ES23 at this location was identified as a high priority slope erosion mitigation site with respect to on-going maintenance at the existing road bank.] In addition, we request this project include for the future south leg of the proposed intersection to be constructed on Concession Road 3 at approximately 575m east of Mearns Avenue, including intersection illumination. Response: This project is now #80 in the revised roads capital program (see Attachment 1). Note, Hemson and Municipal staff have updated the project description which now states that the works are from “Lambs Road to Regional Road 42” and the project costs have been adjusted to include cost of an environmental assessment. iv. Culvert Works 4. Please add the creek culvert to be replaced for the crossing of the CPR corridor, referenced in the sub-watershed study and required to unlock growth on the development lands to the north. Response: The sub-watershed study does not make a recommendation to replace or upsize the culvert in question, nor does it indicate the downstream impacts of increasing the flow through that culvert. Without further study and approval by Council there is no basis for including this as a project in the DC Background Study. Page 271 10 v. Appendix B.3 Table 2 – Park Trails There are recreational off-roads trails proposed for the 933 Mearns development which run along the perimeter of the natural heritage system. The trails will connect to the multi-use pathways proposed along the south boulevard of Concession Road 3 and form an integral component of the overall recreational trail network envisioned for the municipality. The Clarington “Parks, Recreation, and Culture Master Plan” dated October 2024 discusses the existing and future recreational trail network of the municipality. The 933 Mearns Ave development property was envisioned by staff to provide a vital link for network expansion. Attached is Figure 7 from the Master Plan, annotated to show the location of the trails to be constructed within 933 Mearns Ave. 5. We request the recreational trails proposed for the 933 Mearns Ave subdivision, including any trail heads along Concession Road 3 at approximately 300m, 470m and 700m east of Mearns Avenue, be included for Section 3.9 “Park Trails” in Appendix B.3, Table 2. Response: In accordance with the LSG in Attachment 2, trail development external to a site is included in the DC rate calculation. As such, the Soper Creek Trail (Cotton to Concession Road 3) project has been added to the DC capital program (project 3.9.10 ‒ see Attachment 1) D. SCHAEFFERS (SOPER SPRINGS) SUBMISSION RESPONSE Appendix C Table 2 – Road Infrastructure i. Road Works – New Urban Collectors 1. Road Project No. 66 on Mearns Ave (Conc Rd 3 to 300m North of Conc Rd 3) will cover only the north leg of a future intersection of Mearns Avenue extension at Concession Road 3. The traffic study prepared by TYLin Group for the Municipality notes that dedicated left turn lanes will be required on the north and south legs of this intersection. Please increase the scope of this project to include for the appropriate turning lanes required for this future 4-way stop intersection. Page 272 11 Response: Mearns Ave. has been removed from the capital program as the project has been requested to be a collector road. Therefore, this project is considered a developer responsibility in accordance with the LSG in Attachment 2. Please ensure the project scope includes for the ultimate new Mearns Ave road culvert required at the creek crossing of Mearns Ave north of Conc Road 3. [Note that in Table 3-2 of the Soper Springs Functional Servicing Study Report (FSSR) dated November 2024, prepared by Tylin Group for the Municipality, the existing culvert ES24 at this location was identified as a high priority slope erosion mitigation site with respect to maintenance already required at the failing existing road embankment and outflanked culvert inlet.] Response: Mearns Ave. has been removed from the capital program as the project has been requested to be a collector road. Therefore, this project is considered a developer responsibility in accordance with the LSG in Attachment 2. 2. Please add a new collector road project covering the entirety of Mearns Ave, extending northwesterly from the limit of the above noted Mearns Ave Road DC Project No. 66, to Liberty Street North. As shown in the traffic study prepared by TYLin Group, the proposed ‘radial’ collector road will connect the intersection of Concession Road 3 at Mearns Ave, to a proposed intersection on Liberty Street North, north of Concession Road 3. The proposed road is depicted on the Region of Durham Official Plan on Map C1 and on Clarington Official Plan Map J3 as a Future Type C Arterial. Response: As per the traffic study prepared by the landowner, the proposed road has been requested to be downgraded to a Collector Road and is considered a developer responsibility in accordance with the LSG in Attachment 2. The Region of Durham has recently confirmed to the Bowmanville North (Soper Springs) Landowners Group that the existing Mearns Avenue Road, and any proposed extension of this road to the north, is under the jurisdiction of the Municipality of Clarington; and, that per Region policy 11.3.1 under the Official Plan, the Region will not assume the authority of any roads which are not under its jurisdiction. Page 273 12 Response: The latest Soper Springs Draft Secondary Plan shows Mearns Ave. north of Concession 3 as a collector road which would be defined as a local developer responsibility in accordance with the LSG. Appendix F – Local Service Guidelines (ii) notes that the oversized portion of the collector road is eligible for DC Credit. Response: Correct, however, collector roads with a 10-metre width of pavement are able to accommodate left turn lanes. Therefore, this work would be defined as a local developer responsibility in accordance with LSG. Please ensure the scope of road project includes for the north and southbound left turn lanes at proposed intersections, as well as the appropriate active transportation facilities. Response: Any road improvements that are a result of the development will be the responsibility of the developer in accordance with the LSG. Please ensure the scope of the project includes for the proposed underlying sewers and watermain along the proposed Mearns Ave extension road. Response: Any storm sewers that service a road considered to be a local service will be the responsibility of the developer in accordance with the LSG. Water and sanitary utilities are under the jurisdiction of the Region of Durham and not subject to the Municipality’s DC Background Study. 3. A new road was shown in the Soper Springs Functional Servicing Study Report (FSSR) dated November 2024 prepared by Tylin Group for the Municipality. As shown on the attached annotated version of Figure 4-1 of the FSSR, the proposed new urban road will generally run parallel to the proposed extension of Mearns Avenue. The landowners request that the Municipality consider this new road as a Local Road. However, should the new road be deemed as a collector road in future, the landowners request there be future consideration for DC eligibility, as Appendix F – Local Service Guidelines (ii) states that the oversized portion of a collector road is eligible for DC Credit. Page 274 13 Response: Collector roads with a pavement width of 10 metres are subject to the LSG. Should there be oversizing beyond the travelled width of 10m, the oversized component would be considered DC eligible. Please ensure the scope of road project includes for the appropriate turning lanes at proposed intersections, culvert crossings, as well as the appropriate active transportation facilities. Response: As a collector road this project would be a local service under the LSG. Therefore, it is not included in the Municipality’s DC Background Study. Please ensure the scope of the project includes for the proposed underlying sewers and watermain along the proposed new road. Response: Sewers and watermains are the responsibility of the Region of Durham and are not included in the Municipality’s DC Background Study. ii. Roadworks – Rural to Urban Collector 4. We understand the west limit of Road Project No.48 on Concession Road 3 (Liberty Street North to 90m West of Jollow Dr) will match the east limit of the Region of Durham roundabout project. Please extend the east limit of Road Project No.48, to east of Mearns Avenue intersection (i.e., east of the above noted Mearns Road Project No. 66), in order to include for the following design considerations: A constant road profile gradient which removes a local low point and directs all drainage eastward, from the proposed Liberty Street roundabout to an outlet location east of Mearns Ave. The outlet location will be within the limits of the Rural Upgrade Project No. 79 on Concession Road 3 (Mearns Ave to Regional Road 42). Response: This project is now Project #80. The design for Concession Rd 3 was included with the subdivision to the south, including a storm sewer stub for the road drainage at the proposed low point. Please ensure the project scope includes for the sidewalks and bicycle lane proposed by TYLin Group along Conc Road 3 (Liberty St N to Mearns Ave). Page 275 14 Response: Sidewalks and MUPs (not including bike lanes) are included as part of the right-of-way and are not considered additional projects. 5. Please ensure that the scope of Road DC Project 79 on Concession Road 3 (Mearns Ave to Reg Rd 42), will include for the ultimate arterial road culvert required at the creek crossing in order to support the proposed upstream growth. [Note that in Table 3-2 of the Soper Springs FSSR, the existing culvert ES23 at this location was identified as a high priority slope erosion mitigation site, with respect to maintenance already required at the existing road bank.] Response: This project is now project #80 and has been updated to include urbanization from Mearns to Lambs and rural upgrade from Lambs to Reg Rd 42. The project cost has also been updated to include costs related to an environmental assessment. 6. Please add a right-of-way urbanization project for Liberty Street (Conc Rd 3 to North Urban Boundary) as recommended by TYLin Group, which scope incorporates the following: Project No. 127 Liberty Street Sidewalk (Conc Rd 3 to North Urban Boundary) The TYLin Group proposed bicycle lanes on Liberty Street North The ultimate arterial road culvert required at the creek crossing Response: Liberty Street is considered a Regional Road and is not the Municipality’s responsibility. iii. Intersection Works 7. Please add the intersection proposed by the TIS on Liberty Street North, north of Concession Road 3, where the proposed radial extension of Mearns Avenue intersects Liberty Street North. Response: The intersection proposed by the TIS on Liberty Street North is not the responsibility of the Municipality of Clarington. Appendix B.3, Table 2, Section 3.9 – Park trails There are recreational off-road trails proposed for Soper Springs to run within the natural heritage system. The trails will be branching within Soper Springs to connect to Page 276 15 the multi-use pathways proposed along the south boulevard of Concession Road 3, and to the proposed sidewalk and bicycle lanes along Liberty Street North, to form an integral component of the overall recreational trail network envisioned for the Municipality. The Clarington ‘Parks, Recreation, and Culture Master Plan’ dated October 2024 discusses the existing and future recreational trail network of the Municipality. The Soper Springs Secondary Plan was envisioned by staff to provide vital links for network expansion. Attached is Figure 7 from the Master Plan, annotated to show the location of the trails to be constructed within Soper Springs. 8. We request the recreational trails proposed for Soper Springs Secondary Plan to be included for under Section 3.9 ‘Park Trails’ in Appendix B.3, Table 2. Response: In accordance with the LSG in Attachment 2, the recreational trails proposed for Soper Springs Secondary Plan are internal to the development and therefore a local developer responsibility. Appendix B.3, Table 2, Section 3.7 – Park Development 9. Please provide details concerning the location and cost for Project No 3.7.22 Soper Springs Neighbourhood Park (Gross Cost $650,000) timed for Year 2026, shown under Section 3.7. Response: The project location has been identified with a yellow star in Figure 4-1 below. The parks denoted with a green square represent parkettes. Page 277 16 Page 278 17 Page 279 18 E. SCS SUBMISSION RESPONSE i. Internal Crossing Table 1 below outlines the proposed crossings and a summary of the additional items that should be included in the 2025 DC Background Study. Table 1 – Proposed Crossings to be Included in 2025 DC Background Study 1 Hancock Road Tooley Creek Tributary Crossing between Meadowglade Road and Highway 2 Study (project #100). (North-South Route between Courtice and Hancock Roads Meadowglade Road and Highway 2 The proposed crossing is a direct developer responsibility in accordance with the LSG (Attachment 2). Farmington Drive Extension between Bloor Street and Meadowglade Road Extension Farmington Drive Extension is intended to be removed from the Municipality’s Official Plan and will not be constructed by the Municipality. This is a collector road which is internal to the development and therefore is a local developer responsibility in accordance with the LSG. Page 280 19 The draft DCBS currently includes the construction of 1800m of Meadowglade Road between the East Limits and Hancock Road (Town Project No. 100). This is included as a New 4-lane Urban road with a gross cost of $12.3 million. Please confirm what is included in the gross cost for this road, and if the cost includes any internal crossings that will be required along the Tooley Creek Tributary as there will be approximately three crossings. As well, please confirm that the gross cost estimate for Project No. 67 - Bloor Street Upgrade from Courtice Road to Hancock Road includes the cost for any works related to existing culvert upgrades. ii. Intersection Improvements Table 2 below outlines the proposed intersection improvements and a summary of the additional items that should be included in the 2025 DC Background Study. Table 2 – Proposed Intersections to be Included in the 2025 DC Background Study 1 Highway 2 at Proposed Collector Arterial B As per the map provided, the Region of Durham/MTO are responsible for this project. Therefore, it is not included in the DC Background Study. As per the map provided, the Region of Durham/MTO are responsible for this project. Therefore, it is not included in the DC Background Study. Page 281 20 3 Courtice Road at Proposed Collector Arterial A As per the map provided, the Region of Durham/MTO are responsible for this project. Therefore, it is not included in the DC Background Study. at Sandringham Drive As per the map provided, the Region of Durham/MTO are responsible for this project. Therefore, it is not included in the DC Background Study. iii. Road Works Table 3 below outlines the proposed road works and a summary of the additional items that should be included in the 2025 DC Background Study. These works are above and beyond the average level of service required for the various plans of subdivisions that they will be located within. As well, the Farmington Drive extension north of Bloor Street and south of Meadowglade Road will be located within the NHS lands and will have no direct connections or benefit to the local owners. Table 3 – Proposed Road works to be Included in the 2025 DC Background Study 1 Farmington Drive Meadowglade Road South limits to SPA Collector Farmington Drive is intended to be removed from the Municipality’s Official Plan and will not be constructed by the Municipality. This is a collector road which is internal to the development and therefore is a local developer Page 282 21 responsibility in accordance with the LSG. Road Realignment Realignment has been added (project #100). Page 283 22 Page 284 23 Page 285 24 F. TRIBUTE SUBMISSION RESPONSE i. Roads & Related Growth-Related Capital program Table 3.1 – Roads – Missing Items that Should be Added Project Description Detailed Description Timing Project Number Response ––––New Urban R3 ‒ Concession #3 (Rural to Urban Collector) - Mearns to Lambs Road Rural Upgrade, we are requesting another line item is added or this item is changed to upgrade it further from a Rural to an Urban collector given our upcoming OPA submission which will be for ~2,300 units and ultimately the other lands in this area will eventually proceed before 2051 as well (~6,400 units from our calculations) 2028 ‒ 2028 Project #70 We have included an additional line item (project #70) ‒ Concession Road 3 ‒ Mearns Ave. to Lambs Road. R4 ‒ Providence Rd (Rural Upgrade) Concession St to Concession #3 the study released I don’t see this project being added. I don’t see a project item for Providence Road Rural Upgrade. On my end project #44 is Benett Road ‒ Hwy 2 to CPR Tracks. 2036 - 2036 Project #43 limits have been updated in the capital program to reflect the request from Tribute. The project limits are now Bennet Road ‒ Hwy 2 to Concession Road 3 and the length has been updated from 2,280m in the DC Background Study Page 286 25 Project Description Detailed Description Timing Project Number Response Please point me in the right direction if I missed something. current capital program. Please note that this project is 100% post-period benefit, as the works are outside of the 10-year planning period from 2025 ‒ 2034. R5 ‒ Lambs Road (Urban Collector) CPR Crossing to Concession #3 Same note as project #79 2026 ‒ 2026 Project #80 (project #79 in the DC Study release on March 24, 2025) limits and dollar amount has been reduced to reflect that the rural upgrade project only runs from Lambs to RR42 rather than Mearns to RR42. Page 287 26 G. WESTON CONSULTING SUBMISSION RESPONSE i. Soper Hills Secondary Plan Area Based on Weston Consulting’s review of the Development Charges Background Study, certain works/projects do not appear to be captured in this study. The items include the following: North-South Collector Road East-West Collector Roads Soper Creek Collector Road Crossing We request that the above items be included in this Study and reflect in the DC By-law allocations. If this request cannot be accommodated, we ask that Council endorse a similar recommendation that the DC By-law be amended as appropriate at the time of the Soper Hills Secondary Plan approval to ensure all projects/works are captured. Response: Hemson and the Municipality of Clarington have reviewed the works/projects stated above relating to Soper Hills Secondary Plan Area. Projects included in the DC Background Study align with the requirements of the LSG (see Attachment 2). In this respect, collector roads are considered a local service if: the works are internal to a development, up to and including a 10-metre pavement width, or external to a development and are required to service such development. As the road works in the Secondary Plan Area have not yet been finalized, it still needs to be determined if the projects will have an oversizing component to be included in the DC Background Study and associated DC rates. If there is an oversizing component which is eligible for DC funding, the DC rates would need to be amended to include the projects. H. PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE CALCULATED DC RATES As part of the above submission responses, changes have been made to the DC rates as shown in the DC Background Study dated March 24, 2025. Page 288 Hemson Consulting Ltd 1000 ‒ 30 St. Patrick Street, Toronto, ON M5T 3A3 416-593-5090 | hemson@hemson.com | www.hemson.com MEMORANDUM Municipality of Clarington Hemson Consulting November 25, 2025 Soper Creek Submission Response ‒ Municipality of Clarington 2025 DC Background Study This memorandum responds to questions raised following the release of the Municipality of Clarington’s 2025 Development Charge (DC) Background Study dated March 24, 2025. The Municipality of Clarington received a submission from Estates of Soper Creek Corporation on October 29, 2025. A. SOPER CREEK SUBMISSION RESPONSE 1. Please add an intersection project proposed on Mearns Ave at Freeland Avenue (between Concession Road 3 and Longworth Ave), to include for the proposed east leg of this future 4-legged intersection, including illumination, line painting, sidewalks and multi-use paths. The intersection will serve the majority of the proposed development north of Hanna Drive. The Municipality is requesting that we extend Freeland Avenue, currently classified as a 26m collector road, into our plan of subdivision at 933 Mearns Avenue. This extension does not provide any advantage for the movement of traffic since it will not connect to Lambs Road due to Soper Creek being the main constraint. Moreover, our proposed plan of subdivision consists mainly of local roads and rear lanes and this extension will introduce more external traffic as an alternative route to connect to the southern portions of Mearns Avenue through Hannah Drive or Crough Street. This collector road extension is not needed as the new community being planned will be family oriented and it is intended that these roads should be used by new and/or existing residents who live in the area. The collector road extension will create a safety hazard and it is not needed for the development of the 933 Mearns Avenue property. Therefore, based on our traffic consultant’s review, the extension should not be considered a local service but rather a broader community benefit as Municipal staff have not provided justification for the Page 289 | 2 extension of Freeland Avenue. If the Municipality is not willing to include this project in the development charges by-law, then we ask that the extension not be required and allow us to base our development proposal solely on local roads. Response: The intersection proposed on Mearns Ave at Freeland Avenue is a direct result of the development and is therefore a local service in accordance with the LSG (Local Service Guidelines). Additionally, as per the Municipality’s email correspondence with John Spina on July 23, 2025, the Municipality’s LSG states that “Entrances and all related costs (including, but not limited to signalization, turn lanes, utilities, and extensions, etc.), no matter the class of road, are a direct developer responsibility”. In the absence of the development occurring, signalization, intersection, etc. would not be required, thus it is considered to be a local service, even though traffic generated outside of the development may use the intersection. This approach is commonly used by municipalities in Ontario. 2. We request a new project that will cover the costs related to the extension of Concession Road 3 from Lambs Road to Mearns Avenue. Concession Road 3 is a Type B Arterial Road that is owned by the Municipality of Clarington and therefore all works related to this extension, including sidewalks, multiuse paths, and lighting, should be accounted for within the development charges by-law. This will assist with the future road upgrades that will be required as the 2051 settlement boundary expansion areas for Bowmanville will need to be planned for including upgrades from a rural to an urbanized road cross section. Also, the intent of an arterial road is for the movement of major traffic volumes into and out of Bowmanville thus it is needed for the broader community benefit to meet current and existing traffic and community needs. Response: The urbanization of Concession Road 3 up to the urban boundary was added to the road’s capital program as part of a request from Tribute. The project costs have been increased by $114,000 to account for street lighting. 3. Please add the creek culvert to be replaced for the crossing of the CPR corridor, referenced in the sub-watershed study and required to unlock growth on the development lands to the north. Schaeffers provided their initial review of the CPR creek culvert to Aquafor Beech and to Clarington as part of their review of the Soper Creek Subwatershed Study. However, we did not receive any follow up correspondence to discuss the matter Page 290 | 3 further. The response from the Municipality, based on the April 2024 DC by-law memo from Schaeffers, asked that we provide an analysis to show that the culvert is problematic. The issues with the culvert were detailed in the report submitted by Schaeffers. If we receive specific comments on what was submitted by Schaeffers, we will ask Schaeffers to reply. The costs for upsizing the culvert should be accounted for in the development charges by-law because this is not a local service and will be beneficial for the broader community by providing a greater developable area for lands upstream of the culvert. The floodplain is shown to be larger on properties upstream as the water from Soper Creek is backed up at the culvert. Response: As stated in our letter dated, June 20, 2025; The sub-watershed study does not make a recommendation to replace or upsize the culvert in question, nor does it indicate the downstream impacts of increasing the flow through that culvert. Without further study and approval by Council there is no basis for including this as a project in the DC Background Study. Additionally, the Municipality does not own that culvert. Thus, the rail authority should be contacted directly for what work would be required to replace the culvert and proceed with development. 4. Please include a new project in the DC by-law which accounts for the proposed Mearns Avenue extension within the Soper Springs Secondary Plan Area. Mearns Avenue was previously proposed to be an arterial road illustrated under Schedules B and J of the Municipality of Clarington Official Plan 2024 Office Consolidation. The Region of Durham had noted in their 2017 Transportation Master Plan that additional background studies would be needed for the alignment of the road. Clarington staff report PSD-060-16 notes that the Mearns Avenue north limit arterial was removed due to environmental constraints prompting the realignment to connect with Liberty Street. The intent of a collector road under policy 19.6.20 is to move a moderate volume of traffic over short distances. This means that the road is intended to provide a broader community benefit which is the movement of a larger volume traffic from Mearns Avenue to Liberty Street and not solely local traffic from the Soper Springs Secondary Plan Area. Page 291 | 4 The development of the Soper Springs Secondary Plan Area does not require a collector road and can function well through a local road system. The local roads would funnel traffic onto Mearns Avenue and Liberty Street as part of the existing road network within Bowmanville. The collector road should not be deemed a local service simply because it is within a new secondary plan; on the contrary, it should be assessed on its usage in the broader settlement context. The connection between Mearns Avenue and Liberty Street is a greater community benefit that outweighs the benefit to the secondary plan area and thus it should be included in the DC charge. We have provided an alternative road network to the Municipality of Clarington for review that shows we do not need a collector road to have a functional community. The above is applicable to the portion of the Mearns Avenue extension north of Concession Road 3 into the Soper Springs Secondary Plan Area connecting to Liberty St just North of Concession Road 3. However, the extension of Mearns Avenue from Freeland Avenue to Concession Road 3 should be included in the development charges bylaw as a Type C Arterial Road. This stretch of road is beneficial for the broader community and should not be the responsibility of the owner of the 933 Mearns Avenue development as it is the responsibility of the Municipality to provide for the extension of these larger roadways for the movement of traffic and to facilitate development within Bowmanville. Response: As per the LSG, the Municipality is responsible for the oversized share of a collector road internal to a development. The oversized share of a collector roads will be determined based on the difference between the cost of providing a local development share of a collector road (10-metre of pavement width) and the proposed collector road, Additionally, as stated in our letter dated, June 20, 2025; Mearns Ave. has been removed from the capital program as the project has been requested to be a collector road. Therefore, this project is considered a developer responsibility in accordance with the Local Service Guideline. As per the LSG's request to propose Mearns as a collector, under the DC definition for local service the Municipality is only responsible for oversizing which not be incurred. 5. Trail connections proposed for the Soper Springs Secondary Plan Area should be partially covered under the development charges by-law. Page 292 | 5 The Clarington ‘Parks, Recreation, and Culture Master Plan’ dated October 2024 discusses the existing and future trail network within the Municipality. The Soper Springs Secondary Plan provides vital links for network expansion. The trails will be used by the broader community in general in addition to the new residents of the planned community within the secondary plan area. We believe it is fair that the Municipality provide development charge credit since the main feature of this community will be the vast natural heritage features which will encourage existing residents to access and use these trails more often. Response: The LSG states; Costs related to the following shall be a direct developer responsibility and are not included in the DC calculation: a. All costs associated with recreational trails and multi-use paths (including bridges, guards and retaining walls) constructed within the development. All other recreational trails shall be included in the DC Background Study and funded through the Parks and Recreation development charge. Therefore, in accordance with the LSG, recreational trails in the Municipality’s Official Plan, that are intended to be through the development are a local developer responsibility. The Municipality of Clarington is responsible for the connections. B. PROPOSED TIMING OF BY-LAW PASSAGE It is also important to note that staff have provided direction to defer the proposed passage of the new DC By-law from September 2025, to December 15, 2025. C. NEXT STEPS We wish to thank the development industry for reviewing the providing comments on the DC Background Study as part of the public consultation process. Should further questions or comments arise, they can be directed to: Musawer Muhtaj, Senior Financial Analyst, Financial Planning, mmuhtaj@clarington.net Page 293 Hemson Consulting Ltd 1000 ‒ 30 St. Patrick Street, Toronto, ON M5T 3A3 416-593-5090 | hemson@hemson.com | www.hemson.com MEMORANDUM Municipality of Clarington Hemson Consulting June 20, 2025 Response to Questions Raised by BILD This memorandum provides a response to the questions raised by the Building Industry and Land Development Association (BILD) in response to the release of the Municipality of Clarington’s 2025 Community Benefits Charges (CBC) Strategy and Bylaw on March 24, 2025. CBC BYLAW 1.Consider adding a new section, after section 12, entitled "Other Exemptions". Consider providing an exemption for developments that are approved or in the pipeline (prior to enactment of the CBC By-law) but which have not yet obtained a building permit. Example, approved developments (i.e. zoning approved) will always be exempt. Developments applications which were deemed complete before the enactment of the CBC By-law and which obtain a building permit prior to 5 years from the date the CBC by-law comes into force, are also exempt. Response: At this time, no additional exemptions are being recommended by Municipal staff. Council has the discretion to provide additional exemptions, if they so choose. 2.“Storey” definition - need to exempt rooftop mechanical even when enclosed. Response: The definition of “storey” has been amended to exclude enclosed rooftop mechanical equipment. See the revised Draft CBC By-law in Attachment 1. 3.Section 19 – suggest to update section to say “...the Municipality shall immediately refund the owner the difference between the amount paid and the 4% of the land value determined by the owner’s Appraisal”. Attachment 2 to Report FSD-035-25 Page 294 Response: Section 19 of the CBC Bylaw has been updated to say “...the Municipality shall immediately refund the owner the difference between the amount paid and the 4% of the land value determined by the owner’s Appraisal”, as requested. See the revised Draft CBC By-law in Attachment 1. Page 295 Attachment 3 to Report FSD-035-25 The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington By-law 2025-XXX Being a by-law to impose development charges against land in the Municipality of Clarington pursuant to the Development Charges Act, 1997, as amended Whereas subsection 2(1) of the Development Charges Act, 1997, S.O. 1997, c.27 (the “Act”) provides that the council of a municipality may by by-law impose development charges against land to pay for increased capi tal costs required because of increased needs for services arising from the development of the area to which the by-law applies; and Whereas a Development Charges Background Study (the “Study”) dated March 24, 2025, as amended, has been prepared in support of the imposition of development charges; and Whereas Council of the Municipality of Clarington has given notice and held a public meeting on April 7, 2025, in accordance with section 12(1) of the Act; and Whereas the Municipality of Clarington heard all persons who applied to be heard whether in objection to, or support of, the proposed development charges at a public meeting on April 7, 2025, and on the December 15, 2025 council meeting determined that no additional public meeting was required; and Whereas Council of the Municipality of Clarington on December 15, 2025 determined that the increase in the need for services attributable to the anticipated development as contemplated in the Study, including any capital costs, will be met by updating the capital budget and forecast for the Municipality of Clarington, where appropriate; and Whereas Council of the Municipality of Clarington on December 15, 2025 determined that the future excess capacity identified in the Study, shall be paid for by the development charges contemplated in the said Study, or other similar charges; and Whereas by resolution passed by Council of the Municipality of Clarington on December 15, 2025, Council has given consideration of the use of more than on Development Charge By-law to reflect different needs for services in different areas, also known as “area rating” or “area specific development charges”, and has Page 296 determined that for the services, and associated infrastructure proposed to be funded from development charges under this bylaw, that it is fair and reasonable that the charges be calculated on a municipal-wide basis; and Whereas the Study dated March 24, 2025, as amended, includes an Asset Management Plan that deals with all assets whose capital costs are intended to be funded under the Development Charge By-law and that such assets are considered to be financially sustainable over their full life-cycle; and Whereas the Council of the Municipality of Clarington will give consideration to incorporating the Asset Management Plan outlined in the Study within the Municipality of Clarington ongoing practices and Corporate Asset Management Plan. Now Therefore Be It Resolved That the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington enacts as follows: Part 1 — Interpretation Definitions 1. In this by-law, "accessory" where used to describe a building or structure, means that the building or structure or part thereof that is incidental, subordinate in purpose or floor area or both, and exclusively devoted to a principal use, building or structure; "Act" means the Development Charges Act, 1997, S.O. 1997, c.27; "air-supported structure" has the same meaning as in the Building Code Act; “apartment” means a dwelling unit in a residential building, or the residential portion of a mixed-used building, consisting of more than 3 dwelling units, which dwelling units have a common entrance to grade . Despite the foregoing, an “apartment” includes stacked townhouses and means a dwelling unit in a single storey dwelling unit located within or above a residential garage or a commercial use; Page 297 “back to back townhouse” means a building with four or more dwelling units divided vertically including a common rear wall each with an independent entrance and has a yard abutting at least one exterior wall of each dwelling unit; “bedroom” means a habitable room, of at least 7 square metres where a built-in closet is not provided, or at least 6 square metres where a built-in closet is provided, including a den, study, loft or other similar area, but does not include a living room, a dining room, a bathroom or a kitchen; "building" means a building or structure that occupies an area greater than 10 square metres consisting of a wall, roof and floor or a structural system serving the function thereof, and includes an air-supported structure; "Building Code" means the Building Code Act, 1992, S.O. 1992, c.23 and all Regulations thereunder including the Ontario Building Code, 2012; "Council" means Council of the Municipality of Clarington; "development" means any activity or proposed activity in respect of land that requires one or more of the actions or decisions referred to in section 12 and includes redevelopment or a conversion from one use to another; "development charge" means a development charge imposed by this by-law; "duplex" means a residential building containing two (2) dwelling units divided horizontally from each other; "dwelling unit" means one or more habitable rooms designed or intended to be used together as a single and separate housekeeping unit by one or more persons, containing its own full kitchen and sanitary facilities, with a private entrance from outside the unit itself; "floor" includes a paved, concrete, wooden, gravel or dirt floor; "grade" means the average level of the proposed finished surface of the ground immediately abutting each building or mixed-use building at all exterior walls; "gross floor area" means the total area of all floors, whether above or below grade, measured between the outside surfaces of exterior walls, or between the Page 298 outside surfaces of exterior walls and the centre line of a party wall or a demising wall as the case may be, including mezzanines, air-supported structures, interior corridors, lobbies, basements, cellars, half-stories, common areas, and the space occupied by interior walls or partitions, but excluding any areas used for, (a) loading bays, parking of motor vehicles, retail gas pump canopies; and (b) enclosed garbage storage in an accessory building; "heritage building" means a building designated under section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. 0.18 and, for purpose of subsection 36(7), includes any building identified as "primary resource" in the registry maintained by the Municipality pursuant to section 28 of such Act; "industrial", in reference to use, means any land, building or structure or portions thereof used, designed or intended for or in connection with manufacturing, producing, processing, fabricating, assembling, refining, research and development, storage of materials and products, truck terminals, warehousing, but does not include, (a) retail service sales or rental areas, storage or warehousing areas used, designed or intended to be used in connection with retail sales, servic e or rental areas, warehouse clubs or similar uses, self-storage mini warehouses, and secure document storage; and (b) office areas that are not accessory to any of the foregoing areas or uses or accessory office uses that are greater than 25% of the gross floor area of the building; “institutional” means institutional development as defined in the Development Charges Act and Ontario Regulation 82/98, as amended. "linked building" means a residential building that is divided vertically so as to contain only two separate dwelling units, connected underground by footing and foundation, each of which has an independent entrance directly from the outside of the building and is located on a separate lot; "lot" means a parcel of land within a registered plan of subdivision or any land that may be legally conveyed under the exemptions provided in clause 50(3)(b) Page 299 or 50(5)(a) of the Planning Act; "mezzanine" has the same meaning as in the Building Code Act; "mixed-use building" means a building used, designed or intended to be used either for a combination of non-residential and residential areas and uses, or for a combination of different classes or types of non-residential areas and uses; "mobile home" means a dwelling unit that is designed to be made mobile, and constructed or manufactured to provide a permanent or temporary residence for one or more persons, but does not include a travel trailer or tent trailer; "multiple dwelling" means a dwelling unit in a residential building or the portion of a mixed-use building that contains multiple dwelling units (other than dwelling units contained in an apartment building, linked building, semi-detached building or single detached dwelling) and includes, back-to-back townhouses, plexes and townhouses; "Municipality" means The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington or the geographic area of the Municipality of Clarington, as the context requires; “non-industrial” in reference to use, means lands, buildings or structures used or designed or intended for use for a purpose which is not residential or industrial; “non-profit housing development” means the development of a non-profit housing building or structure as defined in the Act; "non-residential", in reference to use, means a building or portions of a mixed- use building containing floors or portions of floors which are used, designed or intended to be used for a purpose which is not residential, and includes a hotel, motel and a retirement residence; "owner" means the owner of land or a person who has made application for an approval for the development of land against which a development charge is imposed; "party wall" means a wall jointly owned and jointly used by 2 parties under an easement agreement or by right in law and erected on a line separating 2 parcels of land each of which is, or is capable of being, a separate lot; Page 300 "Planning Act" means the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13; "plex" means a duplex, triplex, fourplex or sixplex; "residential", in reference to use, means a building or a portion of a mixed -use building and floors or portions of floors contained therein that are used, designed or intended to be used as living accommodation for one or more individuals provided in dwelling units and any building accessory to such dwelling units; "retirement residence" means a unit within a residential building or the residential portion of a mixed-use building that provides living accommodation, where common facilities for the preparation and consumption of food are provided for the residents of the building, and where each unit or living accommodation has separate sanitary facilities, less than full kitchen facilities and a separate entran ce from a common corridor; “rooming house” means a detached building or structure which comprises rooms that are rented for lodging and where the rooms do not have both culinary and sanitary facilities for the exclusive use of individual occupants; "semi-detached building" means a residential building that is divided vertically so as to contain only two separate dwelling units, each of which has an independent entrance directly from outside of the building; "service" means a service designated by section 10; "single-detached dwelling" means a residential building containing only one dwelling unit which is not attached to any other building or structure except its own garage or shed and has no dwelling units either above it or below it, and includes a mobile home and a linked building; "sixplex" means a pair of triplexes divided vertically one from the other by a common wall; “stacked townhouse” means a building, other than a plex, a detached dwelling or townhouse, containing at least 3 dwelling units; each dwelling unit separated from the other vertically and/or horizontally and each dwelling unit having a separate entrance to grade. Page 301 “townhouse” means a residential building containing three or more dwelling units separated by vertical division, each of which units has a separate entrance to grade; "triplex" means a residential building containing 3 dwelling units; and "Zoning By-laws" means the Municipality's current zoning by-law. References 2. In this by-law, reference to any Act, Regulation, Plan or By-Law is reference to the Act, Regulation, Plan or By-Law as it is amended or re-enacted from time to time. 3. Unless otherwise specified, references in this by-law to Schedules, Parts, sections, subsections, clauses and paragraphs are to Schedules, Parts, sections, subsections, clauses and paragraphs in this by-law. Word Usage 4. This by-law shall be read with all changes in gender or number as the context may require. 5. In this by-law, a grammatical variation of a defined word or expression has a corresponding meaning. 6. The Clerk of the Municipality is authorized to effect any minor modifications, corrections or omissions solely of an administrative, numerical, grammatical, semantical or descriptive nature to this by-law or its schedules after the passage of this by-law. Schedules 7. The following Schedules are attached to and form part of this by-law: Schedule 1 —Municipal-Wide Development Charges Schedule 2A — Revitalization Area — Newcastle Village Schedule 2B — Revitalization Area — Orono Schedule 2C — Revitalization Area — Bowmanville Schedule 2D — Revitalization Area — Courtice Page 302 Severability 8. If, for any reason, any section or subsection of this by-law is held invalid, it is hereby declared to be the intention of Council that all the remainder of this by-law shall continue in full force and effect until repealed, re-enacted or amended, in whole or in part or dealt with in any other way. PART 2 — DEVELOPMENT CHARGES Designated Services and Classes 9. It is hereby declared by Council that all development in the Municipality will increase the need for services. 10. Development charges shall apply without regard to the services which in fact are required or are used by any individual development. 11. Development charges shall be imposed for the following categories of service and class to pay for increased capital costs required because of increased needs for services arising from development: (a) Library Services; (b) Emergency & Fire Protection Services; (c) Parks and Indoor Recreation; (d) Services Related to a Highway: Roads & Related and Operations; and (e) General Government Rules 12. For the purpose of complying with section 6 of the Act, the following rules have been developed: (a) The rules for determining if a development charge is payable in any particular case and for determining the amount of the charge shall be in accordance with sections 12 through 22. (b) The rules for determining the indexing of development charges shall be Page 303 in accordance with section 23. (c) The rules for determining exemptions shall be in accordance with Part 3 (sections 24 through 31). (d) The rules respecting redevelopment of land shall be in accordance with Part 4 (sections 32 through 36). (e) This by-law does not provide for any phasing in of development charges. (f) This by-law applies to all lands in the Municipality. Imposition of Development Charges 13. Development charges shall be imposed on all land, buildings or structures that are developed if the development requires, (a) the passing of a zoning by-law or of an amendment thereto under section 34 of the Planning Act; (b) the approval of a minor variance under section 45 of the Planning Act; (c) a conveyance of land to which a by-law passed under subsection 50(7) of the Planning Act applies; (d) the approval of a plan of subdivision under section 51 of the Planning Act; (e) a consent under section 53 of the Planning Act; (f) the approval of a description under section 9 of the Condominium Act, 1998, S.O. 1998, c.19; or (g) the issuing of a permit under the Building Code Act, 1992 in relation to a building or structure. 14. Not more than one development charge for each service shall be imposed upon any land, building or structure whether or not two or more of the actions or decisions referred to in section 13 are required before the land, building or structure can be developed. 15. Notwithstanding section 14, if two or more of the actions or decisions referred to in section 13 occur at different times, additional development charges shall Page 304 be imposed in respect of any increase in or additional development permitted by the subsequent action or decision. Basis of Calculation 16. (1) Development charges for all services shall be calculated, (a) in the case of residential buildings and the residential portions of mixed-use buildings, on the basis of the number and type of dwelling units contained in them; and (b) in the case of non-residential buildings and the non-residential portion of mixed-use buildings, on the basis of the gross floor area contained in the non-residential building or in the non-residential portion of the mixed-use building. Amount 17. (1) The amount of the development charges payable in respect of residential development shall be determined in accordance with clause 16(1)(a) and Schedule 1. (2) The amount of the development charges payable in respect of non- residential development shall be determined in accordance with clause 16(1)(b) and Schedule 1. Timing of Calculation 18. (1) The total amount of a development charge is the amount of the development charge that would be determined under the by-law on, (a) the day an application for an approval of development in a site plan control area under subsection 41(4) of the Planning Act was made in respect of the development that is subject of the development charge; (b) if clause (a) does not apply, the day an application for an amendment to a by-law passed under section 34 of the Planning Act was made in respect of the development that is the subject of the development charge; or Page 305 (c) if neither clause (a) or clause (b) applies, the day the first building permit is issued for the development that is the subject of the development charge. (2) Subsection (1) applies even if this by-law is no longer in effect. (3) Where clause (1)(a) or (b) applies, interest shall be payable on the development charge, in accordance with section 26, 26.1 and 26.2 of the Act, as amended. (4) If a development was the subject or more than one application referred to in clause (1)(a) or (b), the later one is deemed to be the applicable application for the purposes of this section. (5) Clauses (1)(a) and (b) do not apply if, on the date the first building permit is issued for the development, more than 18 months has elapsed since the application referred to in clause (1)(a) or (b) was approved as required under section 26.2 of the Act. (6) Clauses (1)(a) and (b) do not apply in the case of an application made before January 1, 2020. Timing of Payment 19. (1) Subject to subsections 19(2), 19(3), and 19(4), development charges shall be payable in full on the date the first building permit is issued for the development of the land against which the development charges apply. (2) Notwithstanding Subsection 19(1), in accordance with section 26.1 of the Act, and any amendments thereof, development charges for rental housing and institutional developments are payable in 6 installments commencing with the first installment payable on the date of occupancy, and each subsequent installment, including interest, payable on the anniversary date each year thereafter. (3) Notwithstanding Subsection 19(1) and 19(2), in accordance with section 26.1(3.1) of the Act, and any amendments thereof, Page 306 development charges for residential development, excluding rental homes, shall be payable in full on the earlier of the day a permit is issued under the Building Code Act, authorizing occupation of the building and the day the building is first occupied. (4) If the development of land is such that it does not require that a building permit be issued before the development is commenced, but t he development requires one or more of the other actions or decisions referred to in section 12 be taken or made before the development is commenced, development charges shall be payable in respect of any increase in or additional development permitted by such action or decision prior to the action or decision required for the increased or additional development being taken or made. (5) In accordance with section 27 of the Act, the Municipality may enter into an agreement with a person who is required to pay a development charge providing for all or any part of a development charge to be paid earlier or after it would otherwise be payable. (6) For the purpose of subsections 19(2), 19(3), and 19(4) herein, “interest” means the interest rate outlined in the Municipality’s Interest Rate Policy or the maximum interest rate as defined in the Act. Method of Payment 20. Payment of development charges shall be in a form acceptable to the Municipality. Unpaid Charges 21. Where a development charge or any part of it remains unpaid at any time after it is payable, the amount shall be added to the tax roll and collected in the same manner as taxes. Undetermined Non-Residential Use 22. (1) If at the time a building permit is ready to be issued the use of a non- residential building or structure has not been determined as between industrial or non-industrial, the Treasurer may, in their discretion, and at the Page 307 request of the owner, permit the owner to pay the industrial development charges where the owner agrees to: (a) enter into a deferral agreement with the Municipality to defer an amount of development charges equivalent to the difference between the industrial and non-industrial charge applicable to the development, on terms satisfactory to the Treasurer; (b) submit, maintain, and, if required, supplement a non -revocable letter of credit or other form of security in an amount and upon terms satisfactory to the Treasurer to be realized upon by the Municipality in the event that the building or structure is later determined by the Municipality to be a nonindustrial use and the rate in Schedule 1 of this By-law is deemed to be payable. (2) The amount of security provided to the Municipality specified in the deferral agreement may be indexed for the term of the agreement and/or may require annual increases upon demand by the Municipality, and/or may be otherwise calculated in accordance with its terms, all to ensure that the security is adequate to satisfy the owner’s potential future liability for development charges. (3) A building or structure is subject to the industrial development charge rate when it is determined by the Treasurer, or their designate, that at least 51 per cent of the total floor area of the building or structure is used for industrial purposes, as defined in section 1 of this By-law. (a) Where the Treasurer determines that the building or structure is an industrial use, the security provided to the Municipality shall be refunded or returned to the owner, without interest (b) Where the Treasurer determines that the building or structure is a non-industrial use, the Municipality shall apply the security posted as if the building were deemed to be a non-industrial building or structure in accordance with the provisions of this By-law Indexing 23. The development charges set out in Schedule 1 shall be adjusted without amendment to this by-law annually on July 1 in each year, commencing on July 1, 2026, at the rate identified by the Statistics Canada Non-Residential Construction Price Index for Toronto based on the 12-month period most recently available. Part 3 - Exemptions Page 308 Specific Users 24. Development charges shall not be imposed with respect to land, buildings or structures that are owned by, (a) a hospital as defined in section 1 of the Public Hospitals Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.40 and used, designed or intended for the purposes set out in such Act; (b) the Municipality, the Corporation of the Regional Municipality of Durham, or their local boards as defined in section 1 of the Act and used, designed or intended for municipal purposes; (c) a board of education as defined in subsection 1(1) of the Education Act, 1990, S.O. 1990, c.27 and used, designed or intended for school purposes including the administration or the servicing of schools; and (d) a college or a university as defined in section 171.1 of the Education Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. E.2 and used, designed or intended for purposes set out in such Act. Statutory Exemptions and Discounts Required Under the Act 25. Notwithstanding the provisions of this By-law, exemptions and discounts for particular types of development as required by the Act, as amended, shall be provided in accordance with the requirements of the Act ; Agricultural Development 26. (1) In this section, "agricultural", in reference to use, means land, buildings or structures used, designed or intended to be used solely for an "agricultural operation" as defined in section 1 of the Farming and Food Production Protection Act, 1998, S.O. 1998, c.1 but does not include any facilities located within urban areas as defined in the Municipality’s Official Plan; "agri-tourism" has the same meaning as in Zoning By-law (as amended); and "farm bunkhouse" means a building or buildings that are constructed on land zoned agricultural ("A") in a Zoning By-law and is used, Page 309 designed or intended to be used exclusively to provide seasonal, interim or occasional living accommodation to farm labourers. (2) Land, buildings or structures used, designed or intended for agricultural purposes or for agri-tourism are exempt from development charges. (3) Farm bunkhouses are exempt from development charges provided there is an existing dwelling unit on the same lot. Places of Worship 27. (1) In this section, "place of worship" means a building or structure or part thereof that is used primarily for worship and is exempt from taxation as a place of worship under the Assessment Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. A.31. (2) Places of worship are exempt from development charges. Temporary Buildings 28. (1) In this section, "temporary building" means a building or structure constructed, erected or placed on land for a continuous period not exceeding twelve months and includes an addition or alteration to a building or structure that has the effect of increasing the gross floor area thereof for a continuous period not exceeding 12 months; and "sales office" means a building or structure constructed, erected or placed on land to be used exclusively by a realtor, builder, developer or contractor on a temporary basis for the sale, display and marketing of residential lots and dwellings within a draft approved subdivision or condominium plan. (2) Temporary buildings and sales offices are exempt from development charges. (3) If a temporary building remains for a continuous period exceeding 12 Page 310 months, it shall be deemed not to be, or ever to have been, a temporary building, and the development charges thereby become payable. Existing Industrial Development 29. (1) In this section, "existing industrial building" has the same meaning as in subsection 1(1) of O.Reg. 82/98. (2) If a development includes the enlargement of the gross floor area of an existing industrial building, the amount of the development charge that is payable in respect of the enlargement is determined in accordance with this section. (3) If the gross floor area is enlarged by 50 per cent or less, the amount of the development charge in respect of the enlargement is zero. (4) If the gross floor area is enlarged by more than 50 per cent, the amount of the development charge in respect of the enlargement is the amount of the development charge that would otherwise be payable multiplied by the fraction determined as follows: 1. Determine the amount by which the enlargement exceeds 50 per cent of the gross floor area before the enlargement. 2. Divide the amount determined under paragraph 1 by the amount of the enlargement. (5) The exemption provided in this section shall apply equally to a separate (non-contiguous) industrial building constructed on the same lot as an existing industrial building. (6) The gross floor area of an existing industrial building shall be calculated as it existed prior to the first enlargement in respect of that building for which an exemption under section 4 of the Act is sought; Small Business Expansion 30. (1) This section only applies to specific areas in Newcastle Village Page 311 (Schedule 2A), Orono (Schedule 2B), Bowmanville (Schedule 2C) and Courtice (Schedule 2D) as Revitalization Areas. (2) In this section, "existing commercial building" means an existing non- residential building that, (a) is not used, designed or intended for any industrial use; (b) has a gross floor area of less than 250 square metres; and is located on land that is zoned commercial ("C") in a Zoning By- law. (c) Building expansions must conform to the Land Use and Urban Design Policies and Guidelines of the Clarington Official Plan and Zoning By-law and this conformity will be established by the Director of Planning and Development (3) If a development includes the enlargement of the gross floor area of an existing commercial building, the amount of the development charge that is payable in respect of the enlargement is determined in accordance with this section. (4) If the gross floor area is enlarged by 50 per cent or less, the amount of the development charge in respect of the enlargement is zero. (5) If the gross floor area is enlarged by more than 50 per cent, the amount of the development charge in respect of the enlargement is the amount of the development charge that would otherwise be payable multiplied by the fraction determined as follows: 1. Determine the amount by which the enlargement exceeds 50 per cent of the gross floor area before the enlargement. 2. Divide the amount determined under paragraph 1 by the amount of the enlargement. Other Non-Statutory Exemptions 31. The Municipality may offer additional non-statutory exemptions through a Page 312 Community Improvement Plan By-law. Part 4 - Redevelopment Demolition and Conversion Credits 32. (1) In this section, "conversion" means the change in use of all or a portion of a building as permitted under the provisions of a Zoning By-law. (2) Where an existing building or structure is to be converted to another use, in whole or in part, or converted from one principal use to another principal use on the same land, the amount of the development charge payable shall be determined in accordance with this section. (3) Where a building or structure is destroyed in whole or in part by fire, explosion or Act of God or is demolished and the property redeveloped, the amount of the development charge payable in respect of the redevelopment shall be determined in accordance with this section. (4) The development charges otherwise payable in respect of redevelopment described in subsections (2) and (3) shall be reduced by the following amounts: (a) in the case of a residential building or the residential portion of a mixed-use building or structure, an amount calculated by multiplying the applicable development charges under Schedule 1 by the number, according to type of dwelling units that have been demolished or converted to another principal use or demolished and reconstructed as the case may be; and (b) in the case of a non-residential building or the non-residential portion of a mixed-use building or structure, an amount calculated by multiplying the applicable development charges under Schedule 1 by the non-residential gross floor area that has been demolished or converted to another principal use or demolished and reconstructed as the case may be. Page 313 (5) Unless a building permit for the redevelopment has been issued, and not revoked prior to the fifth anniversary of the date on which a demolition permit was issued for the demolished building or structure or the date on which the building or structure was destroyed in whole or in part by fire, explosion or Act of God, whichever is applicable, the credit provided under subsection (3) shall expire. (6) The amount of any credit under subsection (4) shall not exceed the total development charges otherwise payable. (7) No development charge is payable for the conversion of a heritage building located in any Revitalization Areas described in section 32. (8) Notwithstanding subsection (4), no credit shall be provided if, (a) the demolished building or structure or part thereof would have been exempt under this by-law; (b) the building or structure or part thereof would have been exempt under this by-law prior to the conversion, redevelopment or reconstruction as the case may be; or (c) the development is exempt in whole or in part or eligible for any other relief under this by-law. Brownfield Credit 33. (1) The amount of development charges otherwise payable for the redevelopment of contaminated property shall be reduced by an amount equal to the actual costs directly attributable to the environmental assessment and rehabilitation of the property, as approved by the Municipality, and provided a Record of Site Condition has been filed for the intended future use. (2) The amount of any credit under subsection (2) shall not exceed the total development charge otherwise payable. Credit for Relocation of Building Page 314 34. No development charge shall be payable for any building or structure that is relocated or reconstructed at a different location on the same lot. Relocation of Heritage Buildings 35. (1) Where a heritage building is relocated to a different lot, an amount equal to the development charge shall be refunded to the owner upon the building being redesignated as a heritage building on the new lot. (2) Notwithstanding subsection 33, no credit shall be provided in relation to the property on which the heritage building was originally located. Occupancy During Construction 36. A full development charge refund shall be given if an existing dwelling unit on the same lot is demolished within 6 months or such longer period as may be permitted by Council following the date of issuance of the building permit for a new dwelling unit that is intended to replace the existing dwelling unit. Part 5 - General Cancelled Permits 37. A full development charge refund shall be given if a building permit is cancelled prior to the commencement of construction. Onus 38. The onus is on the owner to produce evidence to the satisfaction of the Municipality which establishes that the owner is entitled to any exemption, credit or refund claimed under this by-law. Interest 39. The Municipality shall pay interest on a refund under sections 18 and 25 of the Act at a rate equal to the Bank of Canada rate on the date this By-law comes into force updated on the first business day of every January, April, July and October until the date of the repeal or the expiry of this by-law. 40. Except as required under section 37, there shall be no interest paid on any Page 315 refunds given under this by-law, unless required by the Act. Front-Ending Agreements & Credits 41. The Municipality may enter into front-ending agreements under section 44 of the Act. 42. The Municipality may enter into agreements related to credits for work undertaken in accordance with section 38 of the Act. Effective Date 43. This by-law comes into force and is effective on December 15, 2025. Expiry 44. This by-law expires ten years after the day on which it comes into force. Repeal 45. By-law No. 2025-XXX is repealed effective December 15, 2025. Passed in Open Council this 15th day of December, 2025 _______________________________ Mayor ________________________ Municipal Clerk Page 316 SCHEDULE 1 SCHEDULE OF MUNICIPAL-WIDE DEVELOPMENT CHARGES Residential Charge By Unit Type Service Library Service $1,536 $1,261 $741 $516 $0.00 $0.00 Emergency & Fire Services $805 $660 $388 $270 $4.37 $4.37 Parks & Indoor Recreation $15,739 $12,920 $7,591 $5,282 $0.00 $0.00 General Government $486 $399 $234 $163 $2.79 $2.79 Subtotal General Services $18,566 $15,240 $8,954 $6,231 $7.16 $7.16 Services Related to a Highway $24,922 $20,459 $12,021 $8,363 $201.76 $88.23 TOTAL CHARGE PER UNIT $43,488 $35,699 $20,975 $14,594 $208.92 $95.39 Single & Semi-Detached Multiple Dwellings Two-Bedroom and Larger Apartments One-Bedroom and Smaller Apartments Non-Industrial Industrial Adjusted Charge per Square Metre Adjusted Charge per Square Metre Page 317 Schedule 2A - Revitalization Area - Newcastle Village Page 318 Schedule 2B - Revitalization Area - Orono NT EVI -W STREET ·- Page 319 Schedule 2C - Revitalization Area - Bowmanville Page 320 Schedule 2D - Revitalization Area - Courtice Page 321 Attachment 4 to Report FSD-035-25 THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON BY-LAW NO. 2025-XXX A By-Law of The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington to Impose Community Benefits Charges WHEREAS authority is given to Council under section 37 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended (the “Planning Act”), to adopt a community benefits charge by-law; and WHEREAS The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington (“Municipality of Clarington”) has prepared a community benefits strategy pursuant to subsection 37(9) of the Planning Act; and WHEREAS the Municipality of Clarington has consulted with appropriate persons and public bodies in the preparation of this by-law in accordance with subsection 37(10) of the Planning Act; NOW THEREFORE the Council of the Municipality of Clarington enacts: DEFINITIONS As used in this by-law the following terms shall have the meaning indicated: “Appraisal” means an appraisal of land value prepared in accordance with the Canadian Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice of the Appraisal Institute of Canada; "Basement" means the portion of a building which is partially underground between the first floor and any floor below the level of the first floor. "Building Code Act" means the Building Code Act, 1992, S.O. 1992, c.23, as amended. "Building Permit" means a building permit issued by the Chief Building Official under the authority of the Building Code Act. "Building Permit Application" means an application for issuance of a building permit submitted to and deemed complete by the Chief Building Official, which complies with all applicable requirements of the Building Code Act and the Ontario Building Code, including all applicable laws as defined therein, and includes payment of all applicable fees; Page 322 "Chief Building Official" means the chief building official for the Municipality, appointed pursuant to section 3 of the Building Code Act, or their designate. "Community Benefit Strategy" means the community benefit strategy prepared pursuant to subsection 37(9) of the Planning Act. "Condominium Act" means the Condominium Act, 1998, S.O. 1998, c.19 as amended. "Development or Redevelopment" means any activity or proposed activity in respect of any land, Building or structure, whether existing or proposed, that requires: a. the passing of a zoning by-law or of an amendment to a zoning by-law; b. the approval of a minor variance; c. conveyance of land to which a part lot control exemption by-law applies; d. the approval of a plan of subdivision; e. a consent to sever; f. the approval of a description of a plan of condominium pursuant to the Condominium Act; or g. the issuing of a permit under the Building Code Act, in relation to a building or structure; “Dwelling Unit” means a suite of habitable rooms which: a. is located in a building; b. is used or intended to be used in common by one or more persons as a single, independent and separate housekeeping establishment; c. contains food preparation and sanitary facilities provided for the exclusive common use of the occupants thereof; and d. has a private entrance directly from outside the building or from a common hallway or stairway inside the building; “Grade” means the average elevation of the finished surface of the ground along the front elevation of a building or structure, exclusive of any artificial embankment abutting such building or structure. "Gross Floor Area" means the aggregate of the floor areas of all storeys of a building or structure, other than an attic or a cellar, excluding the f loor area of any private garage. "In-kind contribution" means facilities, services or matters identified in a Community Benefits Strategy and required because of development or redevelopment provided by an owner of land, in lieu of payment of the community benefits charge otherwise applicable, in whole or in part. “Municipality” means the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington. Page 323 "Phase" means a part or parts of a larger development / redevelopment for which separate building permit application(s) will be submitted. "Planning Act" means the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13 as amended from time to time or any successor thereof. "Residential Unit" means the same as a dwelling unit. "Storey" means a level of a building, other than a basement, located between any floor and the floor, ceiling or roof immediately above it, excluding enclosed rooftop mechanical equipment. "Value of the Land" means for the purposes of determining the Community Benefits Charge payable, the appraised value of the land the day before the building permit is issued in respect of the Development or Redevelopment, in an appraisal prepared by or for the Municipality and in accordance with generally accepted appraisal principles and standards. APPLICATION OF BY-LAW 1. Subject to Section 2 herein, this by-law applies to all lands within the Municipality of Clarington. 2. This by-law shall not apply to land or buildings within the Municipality of Clarington that are owned or used for the purposes of: a. the Municipality of any local board thereof; b. a Board of Education APPLICATION OF BY-LAW 3. A Community Benefits Charge shall be payable against land to pay for the capital costs of facilities, services, and matters required for Development or Redevelopment of all lands in the geographic area of the Municipality of Clarington unless Section 2 of the By-law applies. 4. The Community Benefits Charge shall be imposed on all Development or Redevelopment of a building or structure with five or more storeys and that adds ten or more Residential Units. 5. The following facilities have been identified as being required, in whole or in part, to meet the increased need for service arising from the CBC-eligible Development or Redevelopment: a. Parking Services b. CBC Administration c. Climate Change Initiatives Page 324 d. Cemeteries e. Public Art, Heritage, Culture and Events f. Affordable Housing g. Parks & Recreation Infrastructure h. Legislative Services AMOUNT OF CHARGE 6. The amount of the Community Benefits Charge payable is 4% of the value of the land that is the subject of the Development or Redevelopment on the day before the first building permit is issued in respect of the development or redevelopment, multiplied by the ratio of “A” to “B” where, a. “A” is the gross floor area of any part of a building or structure, which part is proposed to be erected or located as part of the Development or Redevelopment, and b. “B” is the gross floor area of all buildings and structures that will be on the land after the Development or Redevelopment. 7. The value of the gross floor area for the types of Development or Redevelopment set out in section 1 of Ontario Regulation 509/20 to the Act shall be deducted from the Community Benefits Charge otherwise payable. 8. In determining the amount of the Community Benefits Charge for a particular Development or Redevelopment the Municipality shall require the owner of the land in question to provide an appraisal of the Value of the Land to the Municipality. The appraisal shall be prepared by an appraiser accredited by the Appraisal Institute of Canada and at no expense to the Municipality. TIMING OF CALCULATION AND PAYMENT 9. The Community Benefits Charge is payable prior to the issuance of the first building permit issued for the Development or Redevelopment. 10. If a Development or Redevelopment is to be constructed in phases, each phase of the development is deemed to be a separate Development or Redevelopment for the purposes of this by-law and the amount of the Community Benefits Charge for each phase is 4% of the Value of the Land of that phase on the day before the first building permit for the Development or Redevelopment of that phase is issued as required in accordance with section 37(32) of the Planning Act. STATUTORY EXEMPTIONS Page 325 11. Statutory exemptions shall be provided in accordance with the requirements of the Act and associated Regulations. 12. The onus is on the owner or applicant to produce evidence to the satisfaction of the Municipality establishing that the owner or applicant is entitled to an exemption under the provisions of the Act or this by-law. IN-KIND CONTRIBUTIONS 13. Council may allow an owner of land to provide an In-Kind Contribution in-lieu of payment of a portion or all of the Community Benefits Charge otherwise payable . The Council shall advise the owner of the value that will be attributed to any In- Kind Contribution prior to the owner providing such facilities, services and other matters. 14. Where the Municipality intends to allow the owner to provide an In-Kind Contribution, the Municipality may require the owner to enter into an agreement with the municipality that addresses the provision of the facilities, services or matters. 15. In the event that arrangements are made for the provision of the In-Kind Contribution that are satisfactory to Council, the Community Benefits Charge otherwise payable for the Development or Redevelopment shall be reduced by the value that the Municipality has attributed to the In-Kind Contribution. 16. Notwithstanding section 13, 14 and 15, any Development or Redevelopment or use that is excluded or exempted by the Act or in this by-law shall not be considered an In-Kind Contribution for the purposes of subsection 37(8) of the Planning Act. PAYMENT UNDER PROTEST AND DISPUTE RESOLUTION 17. Where an owner of land is of the view that the amount of the Community Benefits Charge exceeds 4% of the land value, the owner shall pay the charge under protest and within thirty (30) days provide the Municipality with an Appraisal of the Value of the Land as of that phase on the day before the first building permit for the Development or Redevelopment. 18. If an owner of land pays under protest but does not provide an Appraisal within thirty (30) days, the payment is deemed not to have been made under protest. 19. If the Municipality does not dispute the owner’s Appraisal, the Municipality shall immediately refund to the owner the difference between the amount paid and 4% of the land value determined by the owner’s Appraisal. 20. If the Municipality disputes the value of land identified in the owner’s Appraisal, then the Municipality shall provide the owner with an Appraisal of that phase on Page 326 the day before the first building permit for the Development or Redevelopment as of the valuation date within 45 days of receiving the owner’s appraisal, and subsection 37(37)-(41) of the Planning Act apply. REVIEW 21. Within five years after this by-law is passed Council shall ensure that a review of this by-law is undertaken and shall pass a resolution declaring whether a revision to the by-law is needed and thereafter shall further review the by-law and pass a resolution within every five years after the previous resolution was passed. SHORT TITLE 22. The by-law may be cited as the “Municipality of Clarington Community Benefits Charge By-law”. ENACTED AND PASSED this 15th day of December, 2025. Signed by XX, XX, XX Page 327 TABLE 4 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON SUMMARY OF CBC CAPITAL PROGRAM (A)(B)(C) = A - B (D) = A - B - E (E) Development Related Costs DC Funded Share Development- Related Other Funding CBC Share (%) Total CBC Related Costs 1.0 Parking Services 1.1 Provision for Future Parking Infrastructure 2025 -2034 $500,000 $0 $500,000 0%$0 $500,000 $0 $500,000 $478,358 4%$21,642 Subtotal Parking Services $500,000 $0 $500,000 $0 $500,000 $0 $500,000 $478,358 $21,642 2.0 CBC Administration 2.1 Implementation of CBC By-law 2025 -2034 $200,000 $0 $200,000 0%$0 $200,000 $0 $200,000 $0 100%$200,000 Subtotal CBC Administration $200,000 $0 $200,000 $0 $200,000 $0 $200,000 $0 $200,000 3.0 Climate Change Initiatives 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 Subtotal Climate Change Initiatives $2,800,000 $0 $2,800,000 $325,000 $2,475,000 $0 $2,475,000 $2,335,918 $139,082 4.0 Cemeteries 4.1 Columbarium 2025 -2027 $144,120 $0 $144,120 0%$0 $144,120 $0 $144,120 $136,021 6%$8,099 4.2 Bowmanville Cemetery Road Paving Phases 2 2025 -2027 $282,180 $0 $282,180 50%$141,090 $141,090 $0 $141,090 $133,162 6%$7,928 4.3 Bowmanville Cemetery Road Paving Phases 3 2025 -2027 $144,095 $0 $144,095 50%$72,048 $72,048 $0 $72,048 $67,999 6%$4,049 4.4 Columbarium Concrete Pad 2025 -2027 $28,490 $0 $28,490 0%$0 $28,490 $0 $28,490 $26,889 6%$1,601 Subtotal Cemeteries $598,885 $0 $598,885 $213,138 $385,748 $0 $385,748 $364,071 $21,677 5.0 Public Art, Heritage, Culture and Events 5.1 Provision for Public Art 2025 -2034 $1,000,000 $0 $1,000,000 25%$250,000 $750,000 $0 $750,000 $717,536 4%$32,464 5.2 Provision for Future Cultural Space 2025 -2034 $6,000,000 $0 $6,000,000 25%$1,500,000 $4,500,000 $0 $4,500,000 $4,305,218 4%$194,782 5.3 Provision for Special Events and Festivals 2025 -2034 $1,000,000 $0 $1,000,000 25%$250,000 $750,000 $0 $750,000 $717,536 4%$32,464 Subtotal Public Art, Heritage, Culture and Events $8,000,000 $0 $8,000,000 $2,000,000 $6,000,000 $0 $6,000,000 $5,740,290 $259,710 6.0 Affordable Housing 6.1 Affordable Housing Implementation 2025 -2034 $2,000,000 $0 $2,000,000 0%$0 $2,000,000 $0 $2,000,000 $1,887,611 6%$112,389 Subtotal Affordable Housing $2,000,000 $0 $2,000,000 $0 $2,000,000 $0 $2,000,000 $1,887,611 $112,389 7.0 Parks & Recreation Infrastructure 7.1 2 Arenas (Ice Pads) - South Courtice Arena Expansion 2031 -2034 $59,062,500 $0 $59,062,500 0%$0 $59,062,500 $0 $59,062,500 $55,743,508 6%$3,318,992 Subtotal Parks & Recreation Infrastructure $59,062,500 $0 $59,062,500 $0 $59,062,500 $0 $59,062,500 $55,743,508 $3,318,992 8.0 Legislative Services 8.1 Provision for New Animal Shelter 2025 -2034 $2,500,000 $0 $2,500,000 0%$0 $2,500,000 $0 $2,500,000 $2,359,514 6%$140,486 8.2 Furniture and Equipment for New Animal Shelter 2025 -2034 $75,000 $0 $75,000 0%$0 $75,000 $0 $75,000 $70,785 6%$4,215 Subtotal Legislative Services $2,575,000 $0 $2,575,000 $0 $2,575,000 $0 $2,575,000 $2,430,299 $144,701 TOTAL $75,736,385 $0 $75,736,385 $2,538,138 $73,198,248 $0 $73,198,248 $68,980,055 $4,218,193 BTE Shares (%) BTE Shares ($)Project Description Gross Project Cost Grants / Recoveries Net CostTiming Attachment 5 to Report FSD-035-25 Page 328 Residential Charge By Unit Type (1) Service Library Service $451.95 $462.18 $1,536 $1,261 $741 $516 Emergency & Fire Services $220.39 $242.06 $805 $660 $388 $270 Parks & Indoor Recreation $4,055.57 $4,735.21 $15,739 $12,920 $7,591 $5,282 General Government $151.41 $146.18 $486 $399 $234 $163 Subtotal General Services $4,879.32 $5,585.63 $18,566 $15,240 $8,954 $6,231 Services Related to a Highway (2)$7,416.08 $7,498.13 $24,922 $20,459 $12,021 $8,363 TOTAL CHARGE PER UNIT $12,295.40 $13,083.76 $43,488 $35,699 $20,975 $14,594 (1) Based on Persons Per Unit Of:3.32 2.73 1.60 1.12 (2) Services Related to a Highway include Roads & Related and Operations Unadjusted Charge Per Capita Adjusted Charge Per Capita Single & Semi-Detached Multiple Dwellings and Larger and Smaller Page 329 Service Library Service $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Emergency & Fire Services $4.10 $4.37 $4.10 $4.37 Parks & Indoor Recreation $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 General Government $2.82 $2.79 $2.82 $2.79 Subtotal General Services $6.92 $7.16 $6.92 $7.16 Services Related to a Highway(1)$203.90 $201.76 $89.09 $88.23 TOTAL CHARGE PER SQUARE METRE $210.82 $208.92 $96.00 $95.39 (1) Services Related to a Highway include roads and operations Non-Industrial Industrial Unadjusted Charge per Charge per Charge per Charge per Page 330 TABLE 8 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON COMPARISON OF CURRENT AND CALCULATED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CHARGES Current Calculated Service Residential Residential Library Service $1,485 $1,536 $51 3% Emergency & Fire Services $669 $805 $136 20% Parks & Indoor Recreation $11,321 $15,739 $4,418 39% General Government $466 $486 $20 4% Subtotal General Services $13,941 $18,566 $4,625 33% Services Related to a Highway (2)$17,704 $24,922 $7,218 41% TOTAL CHARGE PER UNIT $31,645 $43,488 $11,843 37% (1) Effective July 1, 2025 to June 30, 2026 (2) Services Related to a Highway include Operations and Roads & Related infrastructure Difference in Charge Page 331 TABLE 9 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON COMPARISON OF CURRENT AND CALCULATED NON-RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CHARGES Current Calculated Current Calculated Service Non-Industrial Non-Industrial Industrial Industrial Charge Charge Charge Charge Library Service $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0%$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0% Emergency & Fire Services $3.64 $4.37 $0.73 20%$3.64 $4.37 $0.73 20% Parks & Indoor Recreation $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0%$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0% General Government $1.43 $2.79 $1.36 95%$1.43 $2.79 $1.36 95% Subtotal General Services $5.07 $7.16 $2.09 41%$5.07 $7.16 $2.09 41% Services Related to a Highway(1)$153.16 $201.76 $48.60 32%$50.17 $88.23 $38.06 76% TOTAL CHARGE PER SQUARE METRE $158.23 $208.92 $50.69 32%$55.24 $95.39 $40.15 73% Difference in Charge Difference in Charge Page 332 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON INVENTORY OF CAPITAL ASSETS LIBRARY SERVICE 2025 Buildings UNIT COSTBranch Name 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 ($/sq.ft.) Bowmanville Branch 24,000 24,000 24,000 24,000 24,000 24,000 24,000 24,000 24,000 24,000 24,000 24,000 24,000 24,000 24,000 $800 Courtice Branch 6,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 $800 Courtice Branch Excess Capacity Adjustment - - - - - - (620) (620) (620) (620) (620) (620) (620) (620) (620) $800 Newcastle Village - - - - 9,100 9,100 9,100 9,100 9,100 9,100 9,100 9,100 9,100 9,100 9,100 $800 Orono Branch 3,604 3,604 3,604 3,604 3,604 3,604 3,604 3,604 3,604 3,604 3,604 3,604 3,604 3,604 3,604 $800 Clarke Schoolhouse - - - - - - - - - - 4,466 4,466 4,466 4,466 4,466 $500 Sarah Jane Williams Heritage Centre - - - - - - - - - - 11,600 11,600 11,600 11,600 11,600 $500 Waverley Place - - - - - - - - - - 5,659 5,659 5,659 5,659 5,659 $500 Total (sq.ft.)33,604 33,604 33,604 33,604 42,704 42,704 48,084 48,084 48,084 48,084 69,809 69,809 69,809 69,809 69,809 Total ($000)$26,883.2 $26,883.2 $26,883.2 $26,883.2 $34,163.2 $34,163.2 $38,467.2 $38,467.2 $38,467.2 $38,467.2 $49,329.7 $49,329.7 $49,329.7 $49,329.7 $49,329.7 2025 Land UNIT COSTBranch Name 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 ($/ha)Bowmanville Branch 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 $1,620,000 Clarke Schoolhouse - - - - - - - - - - 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.44 $1,620,000 Newcastle Village - - - - 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 $1,620,000 Orono Branch 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 $1,620,000 Sarah Jane Williams Heritage Centre/Waverly Place*- - - - - - - - - - 0.52 0.52 0.52 0.52 0.52 $1,620,000 Total (ha)0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 1.21 1.21 1.21 1.21 1.21 1.21 2.17 2.17 2.17 2.17 2.17 Total ($000)$664.2 $664.2 $664.2 $664.2 $1,952.1 $1,952.1 $1,952.1 $1,952.1 $1,952.1 $1,952.1 $3,507.3 $3,507.3 $3,507.3 $3,507.3 $3,507.3 *Note: Sarah Jane Williams and Waverly Place are on the same property APPENDIX B.1 TABLE 1 - PAGE 1 # of Square Feet # of Hectares Page 333 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON INVENTORY OF CAPITAL ASSETS LIBRARY SERVICE 2025 Parkings Lots, Access Roads & Other Paved Infrastructur UNIT COSTBranch Name 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 ($/ha)Asphalt Newcastle Village - - - - 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 $1,550,000 Orono Branch - - - 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 $1,550,000 Gravel Orono Branch 0.03 0.03 0.03 - - - - - - - - - - - - $930,000 Total (ha)0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 Total ($000)$26.9 $26.9 $26.9 $44.8 $325.5 $325.5 $325.5 $325.5 $325.5 $325.5 $325.5 $325.5 $325.5 $325.5 $325.5 2025 Materials UNIT COSTType of Collection 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 ($/item)Books (# of items)143,512 142,322 126,577 127,316 128,319 111,388 111,896 108,376 110,017 110,117 109,619 108,179 107,128 109,526 117,319 $40 Electronic Resources (# Database Subscriptions)59 27 27 27 29 14 19 9 8 11 14 14 14 13 13 $5,000 No. Of Audiobooks 3,418 3,569 3,529 3,603 3,798 4,664 4,126 4,229 4,252 4,500 3,798 3,463 3,587 3,720 3,771 $70 No. Of CDs 2,620 2,621 2,333 2,386 2,378 1,975 1,334 1,015 1,134 1,100 - - - - - $20 No. Of DVDs 9,268 9,456 11,696 12,957 14,047 13,806 14,020 14,113 15,208 11,000 17,073 16,666 15,272 15,373 11,155 $40 No. Of Microfilm 230 230 230 230 275 275 275 275 275 275 275 275 275 275 275 $20 No. Of Special Collection Items ----------199 263 327 455 471 $200 No. Of Titles of E-Resources 63,912 40,662 82,732 98,765 105,376 101,600 118,650 102,889 112,115 121,753 132,034 148,825 169,168 199,106 199,775 $40 No. Of Videos (games)1,066 1,106 619 702 867 581 593 627 867 1,350 1,350 1,178 1,429 1,710 1,785 $70 Periodicals (# Print)2,632 3,183 4,037 4,307 3,143 2,458 2,177 2,235 1,835 2,100 2,100 2,100 2,100 2,976 2,883 $20 Clarke schoolhouse $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,033,000 $1,033,000 $1,033,000 $1,033,000 $1,033,000 Sarah Jane Williams $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $909,000 $909,000 $909,000 $909,000 $909,000 Waverly Place $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $445,000 $445,000 $445,000 $445,000 $445,000 Total (#)226,717 203,176 231,780 250,293 258,232 236,761 253,090 233,768 245,711 252,206 266,462 280,963 299,300 333,154 337,447 Total ($000)$9,386.2 $8,280.5 $9,397.6 $10,136.3 $10,497.2 $9,603.1 $10,283.7 $9,470.5 $9,956.8 $10,248.8 $13,253.7 $13,828.8 $14,583.7 $15,948.3 $16,128.2 APPENDIX B.1 TABLE 1 - PAGE 2 # of Hectares # of Collection Materials Page 334 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON INVENTORY OF CAPITAL ASSETS LIBRARY SERVICE Furniture & Equipment Branch Name 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Bowmanville Branch $1,732,980 $1,732,980 $1,732,980 $1,732,980 $1,732,980 $1,732,980 $1,732,980 $1,732,980 $1,732,980 $1,732,980 $1,732,980 $1,732,980 $1,732,980 $1,732,980 $1,732,980 Courtice Branch $290,000 $290,000 $290,000 $290,000 $290,000 $290,000 $290,000 $290,000 $290,000 $290,000 $290,000 $290,000 $290,000 $290,000 $290,000 New Newcastle Village $357,696 $357,696 $357,696 $357,696 $357,696 $357,696 $357,696 $357,696 $357,696 $357,696 $357,696 $357,696 $357,696 $357,696 $357,696 Orono Branch $272,850 $272,850 $272,850 $272,850 $272,850 $272,850 $272,850 $272,850 $272,850 $272,850 $272,850 $272,850 $272,850 $272,850 $272,850 Clarke Schoolhouse $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $111,650 $111,650 $111,650 $111,650 $111,650 Sarah Jane Williams Heritage Centre $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $90,150 $90,150 $90,150 $90,150 $90,150 Waverley Place $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $141,475 $141,475 $141,475 $141,475 $141,475 Total ($000)$2,653.5 $2,653.5 $2,653.5 $2,653.5 $2,653.5 $2,653.5 $2,653.5 $2,653.5 $2,653.5 $2,653.5 $2,996.8 $2,996.8 $2,996.8 $2,996.8 $2,996.8 APPENDIX B.1 TABLE 1 - PAGE 3 Total Value of Furniture and Equipment ($) Page 335 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON CALCULATION OF SERVICE LEVELS LIBRARY SERVICE 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Historic Population 83,157 84,548 85,990 87,457 88,949 90,466 92,010 93,821 95,667 97,550 99,470 101,427 103,359 105,328 107,334 INVENTORY SUMMARY ($000) Buildings $26,883.2 $26,883.2 $26,883.2 $26,883.2 $34,163.2 $34,163.2 $38,467.2 $38,467.2 $38,467.2 $38,467.2 $49,329.7 $49,329.7 $49,329.7 $49,329.7 $49,329.7 Land $664.2 $664.2 $664.2 $664.2 $1,952.1 $1,952.1 $1,952.1 $1,952.1 $1,952.1 $1,952.1 $3,507.3 $3,507.3 $3,507.3 $3,507.3 $3,507.3 Parking Lots, Access Roads, & Other Paved Infrastructure $26.9 $26.9 $26.9 $44.8 $325.5 $325.5 $325.5 $325.5 $325.5 $325.5 $325.5 $325.5 $325.5 $325.5 $325.5 Materials $9,386.2 $8,280.5 $9,397.6 $10,136.3 $10,497.2 $9,603.1 $10,283.7 $9,470.5 $9,956.8 $10,248.8 $13,253.7 $13,828.8 $14,583.7 $15,948.3 $16,128.2 Furniture and Equipment $2,653.5 $2,653.5 $2,653.5 $2,653.5 $2,653.5 $2,653.5 $2,653.5 $2,653.5 $2,653.5 $2,653.5 $2,996.8 $2,996.8 $2,996.8 $2,996.8 $2,996.8 Total ($000)$39,614.0 $38,508.3 $39,625.3 $40,382.0 $49,591.5 $48,697.4 $53,682.1 $52,868.9 $53,355.2 $53,647.2 $69,413.0 $69,988.1 $70,743.1 $72,107.7 $72,287.6 Average SERVICE LEVEL ($/capita)Service Level Buildings $323.28 $317.96 $312.63 $307.39 $384.08 $377.64 $418.08 $410.01 $402.09 $394.33 $495.93 $486.36 $477.27 $468.34 $459.59 $402.33 Land $7.99 $7.86 $7.72 $7.59 $21.95 $21.58 $21.22 $20.81 $20.41 $20.01 $35.26 $34.58 $33.93 $33.30 $32.68 $21.79 Parking Lots, Access Roads, & Other Paved Infrastructure $0.32 $0.32 $0.31 $0.51 $3.66 $3.60 $3.54 $3.47 $3.40 $3.34 $3.27 $3.21 $3.15 $3.09 $3.03 $2.55 Materials $112.87 $97.94 $109.29 $115.90 $118.01 $106.15 $111.77 $100.94 $104.08 $105.06 $133.24 $136.34 $141.10 $151.42 $150.26 $119.62 Furniture and Equipment $31.91 $31.38 $30.86 $30.34 $29.83 $29.33 $28.84 $28.28 $27.74 $27.20 $30.13 $29.55 $28.99 $28.45 $27.92 $29.38 Total ($/capita)$476.38 $455.46 $460.81 $461.74 $557.53 $538.30 $583.44 $563.51 $557.72 $549.95 $697.83 $690.03 $684.44 $684.60 $673.48 $575.68 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON CALCULATION OF MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE LIBRARY SERVICE 15-Year Funding Envelope Calculation 15 Year Average Service Level (2010-2024)$575.68 Net Population (2025-2034)28,202 Maximum Allowable Funding Envelope $16,235,327 APPENDIX B.1 TABLE 1 - PAGE 4 Page 336 APPENDIX B.1 TABLE 2 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON DEVELOPMENT-RELATED CAPITAL PROGRAM Gross Grants/Net Total Service Project Description Project Municipal %$DC Eligible Available 2025 Post Cost Recoveries Cost Costs DC Reserves 2034 2034 1.0 LIBRARY SERVICE 1.1 Recovery of Courtice Branch Debenture 1.1.1 Principal Payment 2025 -2025 66,000$ -$ 66,000$ 0%-$ 66,000$ 66,000$ -$ -$ 1.1.2 Principal Payment 2026 -2026 68,000$ -$ 68,000$ 0%-$ 68,000$ -$ 68,000$ -$ 1.1.3 Principal Payment 2027 -2027 69,000$ -$ 69,000$ 0%-$ 69,000$ -$ 69,000$ -$ 1.1.4 Principal Payment 2028 -2028 71,000$ -$ 71,000$ 0%-$ 71,000$ -$ 71,000$ -$ 1.1.5 Principal Payment 2029 -2029 72,000$ -$ 72,000$ 0%-$ 72,000$ -$ 72,000$ -$ 1.1.6 Principal Payment 2030 -2030 74,000$ -$ 74,000$ 0%-$ 74,000$ -$ 74,000$ -$ 1.1.7 Principal Payment 2031 -2031 76,000$ -$ 76,000$ 0%-$ 76,000$ -$ 76,000$ -$ Subtotal Recovery of Courtice Branch Debenture 496,000$ -$ 496,000$ -$ 496,000$ 66,000$ 430,000$ -$ 1.2 Buildings and Strucrtures 1.2.1 Book Mobile 2029 -2029 300,000$ -$ 300,000$ 0%-$ 300,000$ -$ -$ 300,000$ 1.2.2 Kiosks/Vending Machines 2025 -2025 100,000$ -$ 100,000$ 0%-$ 100,000$ 100,000$ -$ -$ Subtotal Buildings and Strucrtures 400,000$ -$ 400,000$ -$ 400,000$ 100,000$ -$ 300,000$ 1.3 Parks, Recreation, and Culture Master Plan Projects 1.3.1 Future Library Space 2025 -2034 40,375,000$ -$ 40,375,000$ 32%12,912,125$ 27,462,875$ -$ 12,752,058$ 14,710,817$ Subtotal Parks, Recreation, and Culture Master Plan Projects 40,375,000$ -$ 40,375,000$ 12,912,125$ 27,462,875$ -$ 12,752,058$ 14,710,817$ 1.4 Materials 1.4.1 Acquisition of New Collection Materials 2025 -2034 2,601,600$ -$ 2,601,600$ 0%-$ 2,601,600$ 798,331$ 1,803,269$ -$ 1.4.2 Opening Day Collection Materials 2025 -2034 1,250,000$ -$ 1,250,000$ 0%-$ 1,250,000$ -$ 1,250,000$ -$ Subtotal Materials 3,851,600$ -$ 3,851,600$ -$ 3,851,600$ 798,331$ 3,053,269$ -$ 1.5 Equipment 1.5.1 Network Capacity 2025 -2025 1,000,000$ -$ 1,000,000$ 0%-$ 1,000,000$ 1,000,000$ -$ -$ Subtotal Equipment 1,000,000$ -$ 1,000,000$ -$ 1,000,000$ 1,000,000$ -$ -$ TOTAL LIBRARY SERVICE 46,122,600$ -$ 46,122,600$ 12,912,125$ 33,210,475$ 1,964,331$ 16,235,327$ 15,010,817$ Residential Development Charge Calculation Residential Share of 2025-2034 DC Eligible Costs 100%$16,235,327 2025-2034 Adjusted Funding Envelope $16,235,327 10 Year Growth in Population in New Units 35,923 Unadjusted Development Charge Per Capita $451.95 Reserve Fund Balance Balance as at Dec 31, 2024 $1,964,331 Non-Residential Development Charge Calculation Non-Residential Share of 2025-2034 DC Eligible Costs 0%$0 10 Year Growth in Square Metres $547,703 Unadjusted Development Charge Per Square Metre $0.00 Page 337 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON INVENTORY OF CAPITAL ASSETS EMERGENCY & FIRE SERVICES 2025 Buildings UNIT COST Station Name 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 ($/sq. ft.) Bowmanville Station (Station 1)12,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 $800 Courtice Station 9,000 9,000 9,000 9,000 9,000 9,000 9,000 9,000 9,000 9,000 9,000 9,000 9,000 9,000 9,000 $800 Enniskillen Station 4,211 4,211 4,211 4,211 4,211 4,211 4,211 4,211 4,211 4,211 4,211 4,211 4,211 4,211 4,211 $800 Municial Emergency Operations Centre (Newcastle)- - - - 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 $700 Municipal Operations Centre (Hampton)703 703 703 703 - - - - - - - - - - - $700 Newcastle Station 3333 HWY #2 - - - - 10,152 10,152 10,152 10,152 10,152 10,152 10,152 10,152 10,152 10,152 10,152 $800 Old Newcastle Station (Station 2)6,847 6,847 6,847 6,847 - - - - - - - - - - - $700 Orono Station 6,762 6,762 6,762 6,762 6,762 6,762 6,762 6,762 6,762 6,762 6,762 6,762 6,762 6,762 6,762 $700 Total (sq.ft.)39,523 39,523 39,523 39,523 43,325 43,325 43,325 43,325 43,325 43,325 43,325 43,325 43,325 43,325 43,325 Total ($000)$30,187.2 $30,187.2 $30,187.2 $30,187.2 $33,863.8 $33,863.8 $33,863.8 $33,863.8 $33,863.8 $33,863.8 $33,863.8 $33,863.8 $33,863.8 $33,863.8 $33,863.8 2025 Land UNIT COST Station Name 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 ($/ha) Bowmanville Station 1.08 1.08 1.08 1.08 1.08 1.08 1.08 1.08 1.08 1.08 1.08 1.08 1.08 1.08 1.08 $1,620,000 Courtice Station 0.63 0.63 0.63 0.63 0.63 0.63 0.63 0.63 0.63 0.63 0.63 0.63 0.63 0.63 0.63 $1,620,000 Enniskillen Station 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 $1,620,000 Municipal Operations Centre (Hampton)0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 $1,620,000 Newcastle Station & Operations Centre 3333 HWY #2 - - - - 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 $1,620,000 Old Newcastle Station (Station 2)0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 - - - - - - - - - - - $1,620,000 Orono Station 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 $1,620,000 Total (ha)3.15 3.15 3.15 3.15 3.66 3.66 3.66 3.66 3.66 3.66 3.66 3.66 3.66 3.66 3.66 Total ($000)$5,103.0 $5,103.0 $5,103.0 $5,103.0 $5,929.2 $5,929.2 $5,929.2 $5,929.2 $5,929.2 $5,929.2 $5,929.2 $5,929.2 $5,929.2 $5,929.2 $5,929.2 APPENDIX B.2 TABLE 1 - PAGE 1 # of Square Feet # of Hectares Page 338 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON INVENTORY OF CAPITAL ASSETS EMERGENCY & FIRE SERVICES 2025 Parkings Lots, Access Roads & Other Paved Infrastructure UNIT COST Station Name 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 ($/ha) Asphalt Bowmanville Station 0.37 0.37 0.37 0.37 0.37 0.37 0.37 0.37 0.37 0.37 0.37 0.37 0.37 0.37 0.37 $1,550,000 Courtice Station 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 $1,550,000 Enniskillen Station 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 $1,550,000 Newcastle Station & Operations Centre 3333 HWY #2 - - - - 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 $1,550,000 Old Newcastle Station 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 - - - - - - - - - - - $1,550,000 Gravel Old Newcastle Station 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 - - - - - - - - - - - $930,000 Orono Station 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 $930,000 Total (ha)1.04 1.04 1.04 1.04 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 Total ($000)$1,463.2 $1,463.2 $1,463.2 $1,463.2 $1,636.8 $1,636.8 $1,636.8 $1,636.8 $1,636.8 $1,636.8 $1,636.8 $1,636.8 $1,636.8 $1,636.8 $1,636.8 2025 Vehicles & EV Charging Stations UNIT COST Vehicle Type 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 ($/vehicle) Aerial Station #1 and #2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 $2,496,000 Cars and Vans 9 9 9 10 10 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 12 $62,700 EV Charging Stations - - - - - - - - - - 2 2 2 2 2 $35,000 Grass Fire Truck 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 $111,000 Heavy Duty Trucks 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $125,400 Hurst Tools 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 $75,000 Mechanic Vehicle - - - - - - - - - - - - 1 1 1 $99,500 Medium Duty Trucks 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 $111,100 Mobile Fire Safety House 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 - - - - $99,400 Polaris ATV - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $39,900 Prevention Suburban 1 1 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - $113,600 Pumpers (Heavy Duty Custom)7 7 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 $1,203,400 Rescue Truck 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 $1,142,200 Tankers 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 $500,000 Trailers 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 $52,700 Total (#)43 44 45 47 47 45 45 45 45 45 47 46 47 47 50 Total ($000)$20,269.1 $20,380.2 $21,583.6 $21,625.3 $21,625.3 $21,499.9 $21,499.9 $21,499.9 $21,499.9 $21,499.9 $21,569.9 $21,470.5 $21,570.0 $21,570.0 $21,709.7 APPENDIX B.2 TABLE 1 - PAGE 2 # of Vehicles # of Hectares Page 339 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON INVENTORY OF CAPITAL ASSETS EMERGENCY & FIRE SERVICES 2025 Furniture & Equipment UNIT COST Station Name 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 ($/unit) Station Furniture & Equipment Bowmanville Station (Station 1)$238,000 $238,000 $238,000 $238,000 $238,000 $238,000 $238,000 $238,000 $238,000 $238,000 $238,000 $238,000 $238,000 $238,000 $238,000 Courtice Station $251,000 $251,000 $251,000 $251,000 $251,000 $251,000 $251,000 $251,000 $251,000 $251,000 $251,000 $251,000 $251,000 $251,000 $251,000 Dispatch Equipment Upgrade $2,749,000 $2,749,000 $2,749,000 $2,749,000 $135,600 $135,600 $135,600 $135,600 $135,600 $135,600 $135,600 $135,600 $135,600 $135,600 $135,600 Municipal Operations Centre (Hampton)$240,000 $240,000 $240,000 $240,000 $240,000 $240,000 $240,000 $240,000 $240,000 $240,000 $240,000 $240,000 $240,000 $240,000 $240,000 Newcastle Station 3333 HWY #2 $0 $0 $0 $0 $332,146 $332,146 $332,146 $332,146 $332,146 $332,146 $332,146 $332,146 $332,146 $332,146 $332,146 Old Newcastle Station (Station 2)$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Orono Station $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Suppression Equipment $504,000 $504,000 $504,000 $504,000 $504,000 $504,000 $504,000 $504,000 $504,000 $504,000 $504,000 $504,000 $504,000 $504,000 $504,000 Training / Communications Equipment $830,700 $830,700 $830,700 $830,700 $830,700 $830,700 $830,700 $830,700 $830,700 $830,700 $830,700 $830,700 $830,700 $830,700 $830,700 Number of Fire Fighters - Full Time 55 57 60 61 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 67 Personal Equipment $357,500 $370,500 $390,000 $396,500 $409,500 $409,500 $409,500 $409,500 $409,500 $409,500 $409,500 $409,500 $409,500 $409,500 $435,500 $6,500 Number of Fire Fighters - Part Time 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 Personal Equipment $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $4,000 Other Equipment Self Contained Breathing Appartus'55 57 60 61 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 65 65 65 67 $10,000 Defibrilators 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 $3,200 Total ($000)$6,258.60 $6,291.60 $6,341.10 $6,357.60 $4,109.35 $4,109.35 $4,109.35 $4,109.35 $4,109.35 $4,109.35 $4,109.35 $4,129.35 $4,129.35 $4,129.35 $4,175.35 APPENDIX B.2 TABLE 1 - PAGE 3 Total Value of Furniture & Equipment ($) Page 340 EMERGENCY & FIRE SERVICES MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON INVENTORY OF CAPITAL ASSETS EMERGENCY & FIRE SERVICES 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Historic Population 83,157 84,548 85,990 87,457 88,949 90,466 92,010 93,821 95,667 97,550 99,470 101,427 103,359 105,328 107,334 Historic Employment 22,072 22,328 23,196 24,098 25,035 26,008 27,019 27,576 28,145 28,726 29,319 29,923 30,751 31,602 32,477 105,229 106,876 109,186 111,555 113,984 116,474 119,029 121,397 123,812 126,276 128,789 131,350 134,110 136,930 139,811 INVENTORY SUMMARY ($000) Buildings $30,187.2 $30,187.2 $30,187.2 $30,187.2 $33,863.8 $33,863.8 $33,863.8 $33,863.8 $33,863.8 $33,863.8 $33,863.8 $33,863.8 $33,863.8 $33,863.8 $33,863.8 Land $5,103.0 $5,103.0 $5,103.0 $5,103.0 $5,929.2 $5,929.2 $5,929.2 $5,929.2 $5,929.2 $5,929.2 $5,929.2 $5,929.2 $5,929.2 $5,929.2 $5,929.2 Parking Lots, Access Roads & Other Paved Infrastructure $1,463.2 $1,463.2 $1,463.2 $1,463.2 $1,636.8 $1,636.8 $1,636.8 $1,636.8 $1,636.8 $1,636.8 $1,636.8 $1,636.8 $1,636.8 $1,636.8 $1,636.8 Vehicles & EV Charging Stations $20,269.1 $20,380.2 $21,583.6 $21,625.3 $21,625.3 $21,499.9 $21,499.9 $21,499.9 $21,499.9 $21,499.9 $21,569.9 $21,470.5 $21,570.0 $21,570.0 $21,709.7 Furniture and Equipment $6,258.6 $6,291.6 $6,341.1 $6,357.6 $4,109.3 $4,109.3 $4,109.3 $4,109.3 $4,109.3 $4,109.3 $4,109.3 $4,129.3 $4,129.3 $4,129.3 $4,175.3 Total ($000)$63,281.1 $63,425.2 $64,678.1 $64,736.3 $67,164.4 $67,039.0 $67,039.0 $67,039.0 $67,039.0 $67,039.0 $67,109.0 $67,029.6 $67,129.1 $67,129.1 $67,314.8 Average SERVICE LEVEL ($/population & employment)Service Level Buildings $286.87 $282.45 $276.48 $270.60 $297.09 $290.74 $284.50 $278.95 $273.51 $268.17 $262.94 $257.81 $252.51 $247.31 $242.21 $271.48 Land $48.49 $47.75 $46.74 $45.74 $52.02 $50.91 $49.81 $48.84 $47.89 $46.95 $46.04 $45.14 $44.21 $43.30 $42.41 $47.08 Parking Lots, Access Roads & Other Paved Infrastructure $13.90 $13.69 $13.40 $13.12 $14.36 $14.05 $13.75 $13.48 $13.22 $12.96 $12.71 $12.46 $12.20 $11.95 $11.71 $13.13 Vehicles & EV Charging Stations $192.62 $190.69 $197.68 $193.85 $189.72 $184.59 $180.63 $177.10 $173.65 $170.26 $167.48 $163.46 $160.84 $157.53 $155.28 $177.03 Furniture and Equipment $59.48 $58.87 $58.08 $56.99 $36.05 $35.28 $34.52 $33.85 $33.19 $32.54 $31.91 $31.44 $30.79 $30.16 $29.86 $39.53 Total ($/population & employment)$601.37 $593.45 $592.37 $580.31 $589.24 $575.57 $563.22 $552.23 $541.46 $530.89 $521.08 $510.31 $500.55 $490.24 $481.47 $548.25 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON CALCULATION OF MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE EMERGENCY & FIRE SERVICES 15-Year Funding Envelope Calculation 15 Year Average Service Level (2010-2024)$548.25 Household & Employment Growth 2025-2034 38,395 Maximum Allowable Funding Envelope $21,050,059 TABLE 1 - PAGE 4 Page 341 APPENDIX B.2 TABLE 2 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON DEVELOPMENT-RELATED CAPITAL PROGRAM Gross Grants/Net Total Service Project Description Project Municipal %$DC Eligible Available 2025 Post Cost Recoveries Cost Costs DC Reserves 2034 2034 2.0 EMERGENCY & FIRE SERVICES 2.1 Buildings, Land & Furnishings 2.1.1 Expansion of Headquarters #1 (4,500 sq.ft.)2025 -2025 1,732,500$ -$ 1,732,500$ 0%-$ 1,732,500$ 1,732,500$ -$ -$ 2.1.2 New Station #6 + Fire Training Facility in Bowmanville (20,000 sq.ft.)2027 -2027 20,200,000$ 3,200,000$ 17,000,000$ 0%-$ 17,000,000$ 2,129,091$ 8,961,852$ 5,909,057$ Subtotal Buildings, Land & Furnishings 21,932,500$ 3,200,000$ 18,732,500$ -$ 18,732,500$ 3,861,591$ 8,961,852$ 5,909,057$ 2.2 Vehicles 2.2.1 Heavy Duty Rescue 2025 -2025 1,000,000$ -$ 1,000,000$ 10%100,000$ 900,000$ 900,000$ -$ -$ 2.2.2 2 Super Tankers 2025 -2025 1,536,000$ -$ 1,536,000$ 75%1,152,000$ 384,000$ 384,000$ -$ -$ 2.2.3 Fire Prevention Vehicle 2025 -2025 76,000$ -$ 76,000$ 0%-$ 76,000$ 76,000$ -$ -$ 2.2.4 4 EV Charging Stations 2025 -2034 140,000$ -$ 140,000$ 90%126,000$ 14,000$ -$ 14,000$ -$ 2.2.5 1 Pumpers (Station #6)2028 -2028 1,500,000$ -$ 1,500,000$ 0%-$ 1,500,000$ -$ 903,965$ 596,035$ 2.2.6 2 Support Vehicles 2028 -2028 180,000$ -$ 180,000$ 0%-$ 180,000$ -$ 180,000$ -$ Subtotal Vehicles 4,432,000$ -$ 4,432,000$ 1,378,000$ 3,054,000$ 1,360,000$ 1,097,965$ 596,035$ 2.3 Equipment 2.3.1 18 Pagers for New Recruits 2025 -2025 13,500$ -$ 13,500$ 0%-$ 13,500$ 13,500$ -$ -$ 2.3.2 20 New Full-Time Recruits - Station #1 Personal Equipment 2025 -2025 130,000$ -$ 130,000$ 0%-$ 130,000$ 130,000$ -$ -$ 2.3.3 Public Education Technology 2025 -2029 100,000$ -$ 100,000$ 78%78,455$ 21,545$ -$ 21,545$ -$ 2.3.4 Improved Fire Ground Operations (Years 1 - 5)2025 -2029 35,000$ -$ 35,000$ 90%31,500$ 3,500$ -$ 3,500$ -$ 2.3.5 20 New Full-Time Recruits - Station #6 Personal Equipment 2033 -2034 130,000$ -$ 130,000$ 0%-$ 130,000$ -$ 78,344$ 51,656$ 2.3.6 Improved Fire Ground Operations (Years 6 - 10)2030 -2034 35,000$ -$ 35,000$ 90%31,500$ 3,500$ -$ -$ 3,500$ Subtotal Equipment 443,500$ -$ 443,500$ 141,455$ 302,045$ 143,500$ 103,389$ 55,156$ TOTAL EMERGENCY & FIRE SERVICES 26,808,000$ 3,200,000$ 23,608,000$ 1,519,455$ 22,088,545$ 5,365,091$ 10,163,206$ 6,560,249$ Residential Development Charge Calculation Residential Share of 2025-2034 DC Eligible Costs 78%$7,917,137 2025-2034 Net Funding Envelope $21,050,059 10 Year Growth in Population in New Units 35,923 Unadjusted Development Charge Per Capita $220.39 Reserve Fund Balance Balance as at Dec 31, 2024 $5,365,091 Non-Residential Development Charge Calculation Non-Residential Share of 2025-2034 DC Eligible Costs 22%$2,246,068 10 Year Growth in Square Metres 547,703 Unadjusted Development Charge Per Square Metre $4.10 Page 342 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON INVENTORY OF CAPITAL ASSETS PARKS & INDOOR RECREATION INDOOR RECREATION 2025 Buildings UNIT COST Facility Name 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 ($/sq. ft.) Alan Strike Aquatic and Squash Centre 13,647 13,647 13,647 13,647 13,647 13,647 13,647 13,647 13,647 13,647 13,647 13,647 13,647 13,647 13,647 $750 Base Line Community Centre 4,600 4,600 4,600 4,600 4,600 4,600 4,600 4,600 4,600 4,600 4,600 4,600 4,600 4,600 4,600 $400 Bowmanville Indoor Soccer Facility 28,482 28,482 28,482 28,482 28,482 28,482 28,482 28,482 28,482 28,482 28,482 28,482 28,482 28,482 28,482 $400 Brownsdale Community Centre 3,248 3,248 3,248 3,248 3,248 3,248 3,248 3,248 3,248 3,248 3,248 3,248 3,248 3,248 3,248 $400 Clarington Beech Centre 17,648 17,648 17,648 17,648 17,648 17,648 17,648 17,648 17,648 17,648 17,648 17,648 17,648 17,648 17,648 $400 Courtice Community Complex 47,000 47,000 47,000 47,000 47,000 47,000 47,000 47,000 47,000 47,000 47,000 47,000 47,000 47,000 47,000 $750 Darlington Sports Centre 32,900 32,900 32,900 32,900 32,900 32,900 32,900 32,900 32,900 32,900 32,900 32,900 32,900 32,900 32,900 $750 Diane Harme Recreation Complex 61,900 61,900 61,900 61,900 61,900 61,900 61,900 61,900 61,900 61,900 61,900 61,900 61,900 61,900 61,900 $750 Garnet B. Rickard Community Complex 88,586 88,586 88,586 88,586 88,586 88,586 88,586 88,586 88,723 88,723 88,723 88,723 88,723 88,723 88,723 $750 Hampton Community Centre 3,059 3,059 3,059 3,059 3,059 3,059 3,059 3,059 3,059 3,059 3,059 3,059 3,059 3,059 3,059 $400 Haydon Community Centre 1,344 1,344 1,344 1,344 1,344 1,344 1,344 1,344 1,344 1,344 1,344 1,344 1,344 1,344 1,344 $400 Kendal Community Centre 8,185 8,185 8,185 8,185 8,185 8,185 8,185 8,185 8,185 8,185 8,185 8,185 8,185 8,185 8,185 $400 Memorial Park Community Centre 2,937 2,937 2,937 2,937 2,937 2,937 2,937 2,937 2,937 2,937 2,937 2,937 2,937 2,937 2,937 $400 Newcastle Community Centre 21,002 21,002 21,002 21,002 21,002 21,002 21,002 21,002 21,002 21,002 21,002 21,002 21,002 21,002 21,002 $400 Newcastle Memorial Arena 27,007 27,007 27,007 27,007 27,007 27,007 27,007 27,007 27,007 27,007 27,007 27,007 27,007 27,007 27,007 $750 Newtonville Community Centre 1,680 1,680 1,680 1,680 1,680 1,680 1,680 1,680 1,680 1,680 1,680 1,680 1,680 1,680 1,680 $400 Orono Arena & Community Hall 35,989 35,989 35,989 35,989 35,989 35,989 35,989 35,989 35,989 35,989 35,989 35,989 35,989 35,989 35,989 $400 Orono Town Hall 3,530 3,530 3,530 3,530 3,530 3,530 3,530 3,530 3,530 3,530 3,530 3,530 3,530 3,530 3,530 $400 Solina Community Centre 2,766 2,766 2,766 2,766 2,766 2,766 2,766 2,766 2,766 2,766 2,766 2,766 2,766 2,766 2,766 $400 South Courtice Arena 77,000 77,000 77,000 77,000 77,000 77,000 77,000 77,000 77,000 77,000 77,000 77,000 77,000 77,000 77,000 $750 Tyrone Community Centre 5,887 5,887 5,887 5,887 5,887 5,887 5,887 5,887 5,887 5,887 5,887 5,887 5,887 5,887 5,887 $400 Youth Centre - Resource Area 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 - - - - - - - - - - $400 Total (sq.ft.)490,397 490,397 490,397 490,397 490,397 488,397 488,397 488,397 488,534 488,534 488,534 488,534 488,534 488,534 488,534 Total ($000)$317,972.8 $317,972.8 $317,972.8 $317,972.8 $317,972.8 $317,172.8 $317,172.8 $317,172.8 $317,275.6 $317,275.6 $317,275.6 $317,275.6 $317,275.6 $317,275.6 $317,275.6 Page 343 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON INVENTORY OF CAPITAL ASSETS PARKS & INDOOR RECREATION INDOOR RECREATION 2025 Land UNIT COST Facility Name 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 ($/ha) Base Line Community Centre 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.36 $1,620,000 Bowmanville Indoor Soccer 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 $1,620,000 Brownsdale Community Centre 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 $1,620,000 Clarington Beech Centre 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65 $1,620,000 Clarington Fitness Centre 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 $1,620,000 Courtice Community Complex 3.28 3.28 3.28 3.28 3.28 3.28 3.28 3.28 3.28 3.28 3.28 3.28 3.28 3.28 3.28 $1,620,000 Darlington Sports Centre 1.58 1.58 1.58 1.58 1.58 1.58 1.58 1.58 1.58 1.58 1.58 1.58 1.58 1.58 1.58 $1,620,000 Diane Harme Recreation Complex 2.71 2.71 2.71 2.71 2.71 2.71 2.71 2.71 2.71 2.71 2.71 2.71 2.71 2.71 2.71 $1,620,000 Garnet B. Rickard Community Complex 4.70 4.70 4.70 4.70 4.70 4.70 4.70 4.70 4.70 4.70 4.70 4.70 4.70 4.70 4.70 $1,620,000 Hampton Community Centre 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 $1,620,000 Haydon Community Centre 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 $1,620,000 Kendal Community Centre 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.64 $1,620,000 Memorial Park Community Centre 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 $1,620,000 Newcastle Community Centre 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 $1,620,000 Newcastle Memorial Arena 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.57 $1,620,000 Newtonville Community Centre 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 $1,620,000 Orono Arena & Community Hall 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 $1,620,000 Orono Town Hall 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 $1,620,000 Solina Community Centre 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 $1,620,000 South Courtice Arena 4.50 4.50 4.50 4.50 4.50 4.50 4.50 4.50 4.50 4.50 4.50 4.50 4.50 4.50 4.50 $1,620,000 Tyrone Community Centre 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 $1,620,000 Youth Centre - Resource Area 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 $1,620,000 Total (ha)23.61 23.61 23.61 23.61 23.61 23.61 23.61 23.61 23.61 23.61 23.61 23.61 23.61 23.61 23.61 Total ($000)$38,246.6 $38,246.6 $38,246.6 $38,246.6 $38,246.6 $38,246.6 $38,246.6 $38,246.6 $38,246.6 $38,246.6 $38,246.6 $38,246.6 $38,246.6 $38,246.6 $38,246.6 Page 344 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON INVENTORY OF CAPITAL ASSETS PARKS & INDOOR RECREATION INDOOR RECREATION 2025 Parkings Lots, Access Roads & Other Paved Infrastructure UNIT COST Facility Name 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 ($/ha) Asphalt Base Line Community Centre 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 $1,550,000 Bowmanville Indoor Soccer 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 $1,550,000 Clarington Fitness Centre 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 $1,550,000 Courtice Community Centre 1.24 1.24 1.24 1.24 1.24 1.24 1.24 1.24 1.24 1.24 1.24 1.24 1.24 1.24 1.24 $1,550,000 Darlington Sports Centre 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 $1,550,000 Garnet B. Richard Arena 2.35 2.35 2.35 2.35 2.35 2.35 2.35 2.35 2.35 2.35 2.35 2.35 2.35 2.35 2.35 $1,550,000 Hampton Community Centre 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 $1,550,000 Haydon Community Centre 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 $1,550,000 Kendal Community Centre 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 $1,550,000 Memorial Park Community Centre 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 $1,550,000 Newcastle & District Recreation Complex 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 $1,550,000 Newcastle Arena 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.39 $1,550,000 Newcastle Community Centre 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 $1,550,000 Orono Arena & Community Hall 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.49 $1,550,000 Solina Community Centre 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 $1,550,000 South Courtice Arena 1.68 1.68 1.68 1.68 1.68 1.68 1.68 1.68 1.68 1.68 1.68 1.68 1.68 1.68 1.68 $1,550,000 Gravel Bowmanville Indoor Soccer 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 $930,000 Brownsdale Community Centre 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 $930,000 Darlington Sports Centre 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.49 $930,000 Hampton Community Centre 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 $930,000 Haydon Community Centre 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 $930,000 Orono Arena & Community Hall 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 $930,000 Solina Community Centre 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47 $930,000 Tyrone Community Centre 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.39 $930,000 Total (ha)10.82 10.82 10.82 10.82 10.82 10.82 10.82 10.82 10.82 10.82 10.82 10.82 10.82 10.82 10.82 Total ($000)$15,595.8 $15,595.8 $15,595.8 $15,595.8 $15,595.8 $15,595.8 $15,595.8 $15,595.8 $15,595.8 $15,595.8 $15,595.8 $15,595.8 $15,595.8 $15,595.8 $15,595.8 Page 345 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON INVENTORY OF CAPITAL ASSETS PARKS & INDOOR RECREATION INDOOR RECREATION Furniture & Equipment Facility Name 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Alan Strike Centre $207,500 $207,500 $207,500 $207,500 $207,500 $207,500 $207,500 $207,500 $207,500 $207,500 $207,500 $207,500 $207,500 $207,500 $207,500 Base Line Community Centre $83,900 $83,900 $83,900 $83,900 $83,900 $83,900 $83,900 $83,900 $83,900 $83,900 $83,900 $83,900 $83,900 $83,900 $83,900 Bowmanville Indoor Soccer $346,500 $346,500 $346,500 $346,500 $346,500 $346,500 $346,500 $346,500 $346,500 $346,500 $346,500 $346,500 $346,500 $346,500 $346,500 Brownsdale Community Centre $58,400 $58,400 $58,400 $58,400 $58,400 $58,400 $58,400 $58,400 $58,400 $58,400 $58,400 $58,400 $58,400 $58,400 $58,400 Clarington Beech Centre $495,200 $495,200 $495,200 $495,200 $495,200 $495,200 $495,200 $495,200 $495,200 $495,200 $495,200 $495,200 $495,200 $495,200 $495,200 Courtice Community Complex $714,800 $714,800 $714,800 $714,800 $714,800 $714,800 $714,800 $714,800 $714,800 $714,800 $714,800 $714,800 $714,800 $714,800 $714,800 Darlington Sports Centre $500,300 $500,300 $500,300 $500,300 $500,300 $500,300 $500,300 $500,300 $500,300 $500,300 $500,300 $500,300 $500,300 $500,300 $500,300 Garnet B. Rickard Community Complex $1,347,200 $1,347,200 $1,347,200 $1,347,200 $1,347,200 $1,347,200 $1,347,200 $1,347,200 $1,347,200 $1,347,200 $1,347,200 $1,347,200 $1,347,200 $1,347,200 $1,347,200 Hampton Community Centre $54,700 $54,700 $54,700 $54,700 $54,700 $54,700 $54,700 $54,700 $54,700 $54,700 $54,700 $54,700 $54,700 $54,700 $54,700 Haydon Community Centre $24,300 $24,300 $24,300 $24,300 $24,300 $24,300 $24,300 $24,300 $24,300 $24,300 $24,300 $24,300 $24,300 $24,300 $24,300 Kendal Community Centre $103,400 $103,400 $103,400 $103,400 $103,400 $103,400 $103,400 $103,400 $103,400 $103,400 $103,400 $103,400 $103,400 $103,400 $103,400 Memorial Park Community Centre $53,500 $53,500 $53,500 $53,500 $53,500 $53,500 $53,500 $53,500 $53,500 $53,500 $53,500 $53,500 $53,500 $53,500 $53,500 Newcastle & District Recreation Complex $941,400 $941,400 $941,400 $941,400 $941,400 $941,400 $941,400 $941,400 $941,400 $941,400 $941,400 $941,400 $941,400 $941,400 $941,400 Newcastle Community Centre $399,100 $399,100 $399,100 $399,100 $399,100 $399,100 $399,100 $399,100 $399,100 $399,100 $399,100 $399,100 $399,100 $399,100 $399,100 Newcastle Memorial Arena $692,300 $692,300 $692,300 $692,300 $692,300 $692,300 $692,300 $692,300 $692,300 $692,300 $692,300 $692,300 $692,300 $692,300 $692,300 Newtonville Community Centre $30,400 $30,400 $30,400 $30,400 $30,400 $30,400 $30,400 $30,400 $30,400 $30,400 $30,400 $30,400 $30,400 $30,400 $30,400 Orono Arena & Community Hall $692,300 $692,300 $692,300 $692,300 $692,300 $692,300 $692,300 $692,300 $692,300 $692,300 $692,300 $692,300 $692,300 $692,300 $692,300 Orono Town Hall $58,400 $58,400 $58,400 $58,400 $58,400 $58,400 $58,400 $58,400 $58,400 $58,400 $58,400 $58,400 $58,400 $58,400 $58,400 Solina Community Centre $47,400 $47,400 $47,400 $47,400 $47,400 $47,400 $47,400 $47,400 $47,400 $47,400 $47,400 $47,400 $47,400 $47,400 $47,400 South Courtice Arena $1,171,000 $1,171,000 $1,171,000 $1,171,000 $1,171,000 $1,171,000 $1,171,000 $1,171,000 $1,171,000 $1,171,000 $1,171,000 $1,171,000 $1,171,000 $1,171,000 $1,171,000 Tyrone Community Centre $73,000 $73,000 $73,000 $73,000 $73,000 $73,000 $73,000 $73,000 $73,000 $73,000 $73,000 $73,000 $73,000 $73,000 $73,000 Youth Centre - Resource Area $181,300 $181,300 $181,300 $181,300 $181,300 $181,300 $181,300 $181,300 $181,300 $181,300 $181,300 $181,300 $181,300 $181,300 $181,300 Total ($000)$8,276.3 $8,276.3 $8,276.3 $8,276.3 $8,276.3 $8,276.3 $8,276.3 $8,276.3 $8,276.3 $8,276.3 $8,276.3 $8,276.3 $8,276.3 $8,276.3 $8,276.3 Page 346 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON INVENTORY OF CAPITAL ASSETS PARKS & INDOOR RECREATION INDOOR RECREATION 2025 Outdoor Swimming Pools UNIT COST Park Name 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 ($/pool) Orono Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $1,205,000 Total (#)1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Total ($000)$1,205.0 $1,205.0 $1,205.0 $1,205.0 $1,205.0 $1,205.0 $1,205.0 $1,205.0 $1,205.0 $1,205.0 $1,205.0 $1,205.0 $1,205.0 $1,205.0 $1,205.0 Page 347 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON INVENTORY OF CAPITAL ASSETS PARKS & INDOOR RECREATION PARKS 2025 Parkettes Unit Cost Parkette Name 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 ($/ha) Andrew Parkette 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 $390,000 Barlow Court Parkette 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 $390,000 Brookhill Parkette - - - - - - - - - - - - - 0.50 0.50 $390,000 Brookhouse Parkette 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47 $390,000 Bruce Cameron Parkette - - - - - - - - - - - - - 0.38 0.38 $390,000 Community Garden Parkette 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 $390,000 Douglas Kemp Parkette - - - - - - - - - - - - 0.59 0.59 0.59 $390,000 Firwood Parkette 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 $390,000 Foster Creek Parkette 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 $390,000 Foxhunt Parkette 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 $390,000 Gate House Parkette 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 $390,000 George Reynolds Parkette 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 $390,000 Glanville Parkette 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 $390,000 Glenabbey Parkette 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 $390,000 Haydon Hall Parkette 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 $390,000 Ida Brown Parkette 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 $390,000 Landerville Parkette 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 $390,000 Longworth & Scugog Parkette 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.39 $390,000 Nelson Street Parkette - 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 $390,000 Peters Pike Parkette 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 $390,000 Pickard Gate Parkette (Robinson Ridge)0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 $390,000 Rick Gay Parkette (Cherry Blossom)0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 $390,000 Squire Fletcher Parkette 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.72 $390,000 Trulls and Hwy 2 Parkette - - 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 $390,000 Westview Parkette 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 $390,000 Whitecliff Parkette 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 $390,000 Total (ha)12.93 13.17 13.30 13.30 13.30 13.30 13.30 13.30 13.30 13.30 13.30 13.30 13.89 14.77 14.77 Total ($000)$5,042.7 $5,136.3 $5,187.0 $5,187.0 $5,187.0 $5,187.0 $5,187.0 $5,187.0 $5,187.0 $5,187.0 $5,187.0 $5,187.0 $5,417.1 $5,760.3 $5,760.3 Page 348 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON INVENTORY OF CAPITAL ASSETS PARKS & INDOOR RECREATION PARKS 2025 Neighbourhood Parks Unit Cost Park Name 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 ($/ha) Argent Park 1.80 1.80 1.80 1.80 1.80 1.80 1.80 1.80 1.80 1.80 1.80 1.80 1.80 1.80 1.80 $210,000 Avondale Park 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 $210,000 Baseline Park 1.28 1.28 1.28 1.28 1.28 1.28 1.28 1.28 1.28 1.28 1.28 1.28 1.28 1.28 1.28 $210,000 Baxter Park 1.76 1.76 1.76 1.76 1.76 1.76 1.76 1.76 1.76 1.76 1.76 1.76 1.76 1.76 1.76 $210,000 Bons Park 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 $210,000 Brownsdale Community Centre 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 $210,000 Clarington Corners Park (aka Green Park)2.27 2.27 2.27 2.27 2.27 2.27 2.27 2.27 2.27 2.27 2.27 2.27 2.27 2.27 2.27 $210,000 Courtice Complex Soccer Field 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.43 $210,000 Courtice Memorial Park 1.85 1.85 1.85 1.85 1.85 1.85 1.85 1.85 1.85 1.85 1.85 1.85 1.85 1.85 1.85 $210,000 Courtice West Park 1.90 1.90 1.90 1.90 1.90 1.90 1.90 1.90 1.90 1.90 1.90 1.90 1.90 1.90 1.90 $210,000 East Beach Park 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 $210,000 East Beach Properties 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 $210,000 Edward Park 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 $210,000 Elephant Hill Park 2.70 2.70 2.70 2.70 2.70 2.70 2.70 2.70 2.70 2.70 2.70 2.70 2.70 2.70 2.70 $210,000 Elliot Memorial Park 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.66 $210,000 Guildwood Park 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 $210,000 Harry Gay Park - - - 2.40 2.40 2.40 2.40 2.40 2.40 2.40 2.40 2.40 2.40 2.40 2.40 $210,000 Harvey Jackson Park 2.55 2.55 2.55 2.55 2.55 2.55 2.55 2.55 2.55 2.55 2.55 2.55 2.55 2.55 2.55 $210,000 Harvey Jones Park - - - 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 $210,000 Highland Park 2.10 2.10 2.10 2.10 2.10 2.10 2.10 2.10 2.10 2.10 2.10 2.10 2.10 2.10 2.10 $210,000 Kendal Park 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 1.46 $210,000 Longworth Park 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 $210,000 Lord Elgin 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 $210,000 Mearns Park 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 $210,000 Moyse Park 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 $210,000 Northglen Park - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1.98 $210,000 Pearce Farm Park 2.05 2.05 2.05 2.05 2.05 2.05 2.05 2.05 2.05 2.05 2.05 2.05 2.05 2.05 2.05 $210,000 Penfound Park 2.94 2.94 2.94 2.94 2.94 2.94 2.94 2.94 2.94 2.94 2.94 2.94 2.94 2.94 2.94 $210,000 Rhonda Park 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 $210,000 Roswell Park 2.78 2.78 2.78 2.78 2.78 2.78 2.78 2.78 2.78 2.78 2.78 2.78 2.78 2.78 2.78 $210,000 Stuart Park 2.60 2.60 2.60 2.60 2.60 2.60 2.60 2.60 2.60 2.60 2.60 2.60 2.60 2.60 2.60 $210,000 Tooley's Mill Park - - - - 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 $210,000 Walbridge Park 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 $210,000 West Beach Properties 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 $210,000 West Side Dr. Park 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 $210,000 Zion Park 1.40 1.40 1.40 1.40 1.40 1.40 1.40 1.40 1.40 1.40 1.40 1.40 1.40 1.40 1.40 $210,000 Total (ha)52.80 52.80 52.80 56.00 56.40 56.40 56.40 56.40 56.40 56.40 56.40 56.40 56.40 56.40 58.38 Total ($000)$11,088.0 $11,088.0 $11,088.0 $11,760.0 $11,844.0 $11,844.0 $11,844.0 $11,844.0 $11,844.0 $11,844.0 $11,844.0 $11,844.0 $11,844.0 $11,844.0 $12,259.8 Page 349 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON INVENTORY OF CAPITAL ASSETS PARKS & INDOOR RECREATION PARKS 2025 Community Parks Unit Cost Park Name 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 ($/ha) Bowmanville Memorial Park 2.13 2.13 2.13 2.13 2.13 2.13 2.13 2.13 2.13 2.13 2.13 2.13 2.13 2.13 2.13 $260,000 Burketon Park 2.40 2.40 2.40 2.40 2.40 2.40 2.40 2.40 2.40 2.40 2.40 2.40 2.40 2.40 2.40 $260,000 Clarington Fields Park 17.11 17.11 17.11 17.11 17.11 17.11 17.11 17.11 17.11 17.11 17.11 17.11 17.11 17.11 17.11 $260,000 Darlington Sports Centre 2.80 2.80 2.80 2.83 2.83 2.83 2.83 2.83 2.83 2.83 2.83 2.83 2.83 2.83 2.83 $260,000 Enniskillen Community Centre 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 $260,000 Lions Parkette 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 $260,000 Newcastle Community Park - - - - - - - - - - - - 12.30 12.30 12.30 $260,000 Excess Capacity Adjustment - - - - - - - - - - - - (11.06) (11.06) (11.06) $260,000 Newcastle Memorial Park 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 $260,000 Optimist Park 2.40 2.40 2.40 2.40 2.40 2.40 2.40 2.40 2.40 2.40 2.40 2.40 2.40 2.40 2.40 $260,000 Orono Fountain 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 $260,000 Orono Park 4.10 4.10 4.10 4.10 4.10 4.10 4.10 4.10 4.10 4.10 4.10 4.10 4.10 4.10 4.10 $260,000 Solina Park 3.70 3.70 3.70 3.70 3.70 3.70 3.70 3.70 3.70 3.70 3.70 3.70 3.70 3.70 3.70 $260,000 Soper Creek Park 4.80 4.80 4.80 4.80 4.80 4.80 4.80 4.80 4.80 4.80 4.80 4.80 4.80 4.80 4.80 $260,000 South Courtice Community Park 1.13 1.13 1.13 1.13 1.13 1.13 1.13 1.13 1.13 1.13 1.13 1.13 1.13 1.13 1.13 $260,000 Tyrone Park 4.20 4.20 4.20 4.20 4.20 4.20 4.20 4.20 4.20 4.20 4.20 4.20 4.20 4.20 4.20 $260,000 Total (ha)47.08 47.08 47.08 47.11 47.11 47.11 47.11 47.11 47.11 47.11 47.11 47.11 48.35 48.35 48.35 Total ($000)$12,240.8 $12,240.8 $12,240.8 $12,248.6 $12,248.6 $12,248.6 $12,248.6 $12,248.6 $12,248.6 $12,248.6 $12,248.6 $12,248.6 $12,571.0 $12,571.0 $12,571.0 Page 350 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON INVENTORY OF CAPITAL ASSETS PARKS & INDOOR RECREATION PARKS 2025 District Parks Unit Cost Park Name 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 ($/ha) Bennett Road Future Park (Waterfront Trail)0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 $300,000 Bond Head Boat Launch 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.53 $300,000 Bowmanville Boat Launch (leased from CLOCA)1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 $300,000 Bowmanville Leash Free Park - - 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 $300,000 Bowmanville Valley 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 $300,000 Carveth Open Space along Graham Creek 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 $300,000 Clarke Museum 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 $300,000 Darlington Hydro Fields 11.00 11.00 11.00 11.00 11.00 11.00 11.00 11.00 11.00 11.00 11.00 11.00 11.00 11.00 11.00 $300,000 Lakefront The Glen (east of Bond Head)0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 $300,000 Newcastle Cenotaph 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 $300,000 Newtonville Cenotaph 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 $300,000 Orono Cenotaph 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 $300,000 Orono Fairgrounds 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 $300,000 Orono Woods Walk Trail 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 $300,000 Port Darlington West Beach - - 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 $300,000 Port of Newcastle Waterfront Park 5.84 5.84 5.84 5.84 5.84 5.84 5.84 5.84 5.84 5.84 5.84 5.84 5.84 5.84 5.84 $300,000 Rickard Recreation Park 3.65 3.65 3.65 3.65 3.65 3.65 3.65 3.65 3.65 3.65 3.65 3.65 3.65 3.65 3.65 $300,000 Rotary Park 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 $300,000 Samuel Wilmot Nature Area 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 $300,000 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 $300,000 Total (ha)28.48 28.48 30.01 30.05 30.05 30.05 30.05 30.05 30.05 30.05 30.05 30.05 30.05 30.05 30.05 Total ($000)$8,544.0 $8,544.0 $9,003.0 $9,015.0 $9,015.0 $9,015.0 $9,015.0 $9,015.0 $9,015.0 $9,015.0 $9,015.0 $9,015.0 $9,015.0 $9,015.0 $9,015.0 Page 351 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON INVENTORY OF CAPITAL ASSETS PARKS & INDOOR RECREATION PARK FACILITIES 2025 Baseball Diamonds Unit Cost Park Name 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 ($/diamond) Championship Lit Clarington Fields 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 $900,000 Newcastle Community Park - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1 1 $900,000 Lit Harvey Jackson Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $500,000 Orono Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $500,000 Soper Creek Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $500,000 Unlit Longworth Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $400,000 Penfound Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $400,000 Total (#)7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 8 8 $4,100.0 $4,100.0 $4,100.0 $4,100.0 $4,100.0 $4,100.0 $4,100.0 $4,100.0 $4,100.0 $4,100.0 $4,100.0 $4,100.0 $4,100.0 $5,000.0 $5,000.0 Page 352 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON INVENTORY OF CAPITAL ASSETS PARKS & INDOOR RECREATION PARK FACILITIES 2025 Softball Diamonds Unit Cost Park Name 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 ($/diamond) Championship Lit Clarington Fields 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 $900,000 Lit Bowmanville Memorial Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $500,000 Rickard Community Complex 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 $500,000 Unlit Argent Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $400,000 Bowmanville Memorial Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $400,000 Brownsdale Community Centre - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - $400,000 Burketon Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $400,000 Courtice West Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $400,000 Courtice Memorial Park - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - $400,000 Edward Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $400,000 Elephant Hill Park 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 $400,000 Harvey Jackson Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $400,000 Highland Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $400,000 Lord Elgin Park 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 $400,000 Optimist Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $400,000 Rhonda Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $400,000 Rosswell Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $400,000 Solina Park 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 $400,000 Stuart Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $400,000 Tyrone Park 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 $400,000 Northglen East Park - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1 $400,000 Total (#)24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 23 23 23 23 24 $10,900.0 $10,900.0 $10,900.0 $10,900.0 $10,900.0 $10,900.0 $10,900.0 $10,900.0 $10,900.0 $10,900.0 $10,500.0 $10,500.0 $10,500.0 $10,500.0 $10,900.0 Page 353 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON INVENTORY OF CAPITAL ASSETS PARKS & INDOOR RECREATION PARK FACILITIES 2025 Soccer Pitches Unit Cost Park Name 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 ($/pitch) Lit Darlington Hydro Fields 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 $500,000 South Courtice Community Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $500,000 Lit Artifical Turf South Courtice Community Park - - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $2,207,500 Unlit Baxter Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $200,000 Burketon Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $200,000 Clarington Corners Park (Green Park)1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $200,000 Clarington Fields 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 $200,000 Courtice Memorial Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 - - $200,000 Darlington Sports Centre 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $200,000 Elliot Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $200,000 Highland Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $200,000 Northglen Park - - - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $200,000 Optimist Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $200,000 Pearce Farm Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $200,000 Rickard Neighbourhood Park - - - - - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $200,000 Scugog Street Neighbourhood Park - - - - - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $200,000 Solina Park 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 $200,000 South Courtice Community Park - - - - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $200,000 Tyrone Park 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 $200,000 Walbridge Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $200,000 West Side Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $200,000 Zion Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 - - - - - $200,000 Mini Baseline Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $83,000 Burketon Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $83,000 Clarington Fields 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 $83,000 Courtice Complex 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $83,000 Darlington Hydro Fields 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 $83,000 Enniskillen Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $83,000 Guildwood Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $83,000 Harry Gay Park - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $83,000 Longworth Park - - - - - 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 $83,000 Mearns Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $83,000 Newcastle Memorial 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $83,000 Optimist Park 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 $83,000 Orono Fairgrounds Park 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 - - - - - $83,000 Penfound Park 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 $83,000 Rosswell Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $83,000 Tyrone Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $83,000 Total (#)41 41 41 41 41 43 44 45 47 47 45 45 45 44 44 $6,718.5 $6,718.5 $6,718.5 $6,718.5 $6,718.5 $9,009.0 $9,209.0 $9,409.0 $9,809.0 $9,809.0 $9,526.0 $9,526.0 $9,526.0 $9,326.0 $9,326.0 Page 354 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON INVENTORY OF CAPITAL ASSETS PARKS & INDOOR RECREATION PARK FACILITIES 2025 Football Fields Unit Cost Park Name 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 ($/field) Lit Clarington Fields 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $500,000 Total (#)1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $500.0 $500.0 $500.0 $500.0 $500.0 $500.0 $500.0 $500.0 $500.0 $500.0 $500.0 $500.0 $500.0 $500.0 $500.0 2025 Pickelball Courts Unit Cost Park Name 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 ($/field) Lit Newcastle Community Park - - - - - - - - - - - - 3 3 3 $86,900 Orono Park - - - - - - - - - - 3 3 3 3 $86,900 Unlit Stuart Park - - - - - - - - - - 3 4 4 4 4 $86,900 Total (#)- - - - - - - - - - 3 7 10 10 10 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $260.7 $608.3 $869.0 $869.0 $869.0 2025 Tennis Courts Unit Cost Park Name 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 ($/court) Lit Lions Parkette (Beech Centre)2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 $162,100 Orono Park 2 2 - - 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 $120,800 Solina Park - - - - - - - 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 $162,100 Newcastle Community Park - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2 2 $162,100 South Courtice Arena - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2 $162,100 Unlit Avondale Park 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 $123,100 Clarington Corners Park (Green Park)2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 $123,100 Guildwood Park 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 $123,100 Lord Elgin Park 2 2 2 2 2 - - - - - - - - - - $123,100 Orono Park - - 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 - - - - - $123,100 Solina Park 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 - - - - - - - - $123,100 Stuart Park 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 - - - - - $123,100 Total (#)16 16 16 16 18 16 16 16 16 16 12 11 11 13 15 $2,043.0 $2,043.0 $2,047.6 $2,047.6 $2,289.2 $2,043.0 $2,043.0 $2,121.0 $2,121.0 $2,121.0 $1,628.6 $1,507.8 $1,507.8 $1,832.0 $2,156.2 Page 355 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON INVENTORY OF CAPITAL ASSETS PARKS & INDOOR RECREATION PARK FACILITIES 2025 Water Play Facilities Unit Cost Park Name 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 ($/facility) Avondale Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $205,700 Baxter Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $197,800 Bons Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $197,800 Bowmanville Memorial Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $197,800 Glenabbey Park 1 1 1 1 1 - - - - - - - - - - $197,800 Guildwood Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $197,200 Harry Gay Park - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $197,800 Harvey Jones Park - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $197,800 Longworth Park - - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $197,800 Northglen East Park - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1 $197,800 Northglen Park - - - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $197,800 Orono Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $197,800 Pearce Farm Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $197,800 Port Darlington Waterfront Park (East Beach)- - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $411,400 Rickard Neighbourhood Park - - - - - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $197,800 Rosswell Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $197,800 Walbridge Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $197,800 West Side Drive Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $197,800 Total (#)11 11 11 13 13 14 15 15 16 16 16 16 16 16 17 $2,183.1 $2,183.1 $2,183.1 $2,578.7 $2,578.7 $2,990.1 $3,187.9 $3,187.9 $3,385.7 $3,385.7 $3,385.7 $3,385.7 $3,385.7 $3,385.7 $3,583.5 Page 356 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON INVENTORY OF CAPITAL ASSETS PARKS & INDOOR RECREATION PARK FACILITIES 2025 Playgrounds Unit Cost Park Name 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 ($/playground) Andrew Street - - - - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $145,300 Argent Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $174,600 Avondale Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $175,400 Barlow Court Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $118,000 Baseline Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $159,300 Baxter Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $146,500 Bruce Cameron Parkette - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1 $147,500 Brookhill Park - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1 $188,900 Bons Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $133,700 Bowmanville Memorial Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $129,600 Brookhouse Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $106,600 Burketon Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $147,800 Buttonshaw Parkette 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $135,300 Clarington Corners Park (Green Park)1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $191,000 Courtice West Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $121,200 Darlington Hydro Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $171,700 Douglas Kemp Parkette - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1 $188,900 Edward Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $131,100 Elephant Hill Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $133,700 Elliot Memorial Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $185,700 Enniskillen Park - - - - - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $170,000 Foster Creek Parkette - - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $162,600 Garnet B. Rickard Rec Complex Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $141,800 Greenwood Park - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - $191,000 Guildwood Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $148,800 Harry Gay Park - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $164,200 Harvey Jones Park - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $125,800 Highland Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $104,500 Kendal Park (Harvey Jackson Park)1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $126,000 Lions Parkette 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $120,800 Longworth Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $144,600 Lord Elgin Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $161,500 Mearns Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $161,400 Nelson Street Parkette - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $154,700 Newcastle Memorial Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $95,600 Northglen East Park - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1 $142,200 Northglen Park - - - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $174,000 Orono Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $166,000 Pearce Farm Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $166,000 Penfound Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $126,300 Pickard Gate Parkette - - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $157,000 Port Darlington Waterfront Park (East Beach)- - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $159,000 Rhonda Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $107,200 Rick Gay Memorial Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $142,200 Rickard Neighbourhood Park - - - - - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $171,400 Rose Park - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1 $142,200 Rosswell Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $142,900 Scugog Street Neighbourhood Park - - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $169,600 Solina Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $186,900 Soper Creek Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $105,800 Squire Fletcher Parkette 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $132,200 Stuart Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $151,300 Tyrone Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $172,400 Walbridge Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $177,300 Westside Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $158,000 Whitecliffe Parkette - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $96,400 Total (#)38 38 40 42 42 46 47 48 50 50 50 50 50 50 55 $5,500.7 $5,500.7 $5,751.8 $6,041.8 $6,041.8 $6,690.0 $6,864.0 $7,009.3 $7,350.7 $7,350.7 $7,350.7 $7,350.7 $7,350.7 $7,350.7 $8,160.4 Page 357 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON INVENTORY OF CAPITAL ASSETS PARKS & INDOOR RECREATION PARK FACILITIES 2025 Lacrosse Bowl Unit Cost Park Name 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 ($/bowl) Lacrosse Bowl 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $994,300 Total (#)1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $994.3 $994.3 $994.3 $994.3 $994.3 $994.3 $994.3 $994.3 $994.3 $994.3 $994.3 $994.3 $994.3 $994.3 $994.3 2025 Skateboard Park Unit Cost Park Name 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 ($/park) G. B. Rickard Community Centre 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $316,800 Hampton Skateboard Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $316,800 Newcastle Community Park 1 1 $316,800 Orono Skateboard Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $316,800 Rob Piontek Skateboard Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $316,800 Total (#)4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 $1,267.2 $1,267.2 $1,267.2 $1,267.2 $1,267.2 $1,267.2 $1,267.2 $1,267.2 $1,267.2 $1,267.2 $1,267.2 $1,267.2 $1,267.2 $1,584.0 $1,584.0 Page 358 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON INVENTORY OF CAPITAL ASSETS PARKS & INDOOR RECREATION PARK FACILITIES 2025 Basketball Courts Unit Cost Park Name 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 ($/court) 1/2 Courts Andrew St. Parkette 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $42,600 Barlow Court Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $42,600 Bons Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $42,600 Brookhouse Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $42,600 Elliot Memorial Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $42,600 Foxhunt Parkette 1 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - $42,600 Gate House Parkette 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $42,600 Glenabbey Parkette 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $42,600 Harvey Jones Park - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $42,600 Highland Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $42,600 Moyse Parkette 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $42,600 Northglen Park - - - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $42,600 Orono Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 - - - - - $42,600 Full Courts Clarington Corners Park (Green Park)1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $77,100 Guildwood Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $77,100 Lord Elgin Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $77,100 Optimist Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $77,100 Pearce Farm Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $77,100 Rosswell Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $77,100 Soper Creek Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $77,100 South Courtice Community Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $77,100 Stuart Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $77,100 Tyrone Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $77,100 Walbridge Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $77,100 Total (#)22 22 21 22 22 22 23 23 23 23 22 22 22 22 22 $1,316.7 $1,316.7 $1,274.1 $1,316.7 $1,316.7 $1,316.7 $1,359.3 $1,359.3 $1,359.3 $1,359.3 $1,316.7 $1,316.7 $1,316.7 $1,316.7 $1,316.7 Page 359 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON INVENTORY OF CAPITAL ASSETS PARKS & INDOOR RECREATION PARK FACILITIES 2025 Tot Lots (Playgrounds)Unit Cost Park Name 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 ($/lot) Bathgate Commons - - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $133,300 Cecil Found Memorial Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $141,600 Cherry Blossom Parkette - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - $142,200 Foxhunt Parkette 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $157,200 Gate House Parkette 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $107,300 Glanville Parkette 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $70,000 Glenabbey Parkette 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $185,400 Haydon Hall Parkette 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $113,500 Ina Brown Parkette 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $149,800 Landerville Parkette 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $91,800 Moyse Parkette 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $141,200 Whitecliff Parkette Tot Park - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $88,600 Peters Pike Parkette 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $127,100 Tourist Information Centre Park 1 1 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - $92,200 Total (#)11 11 12 11 11 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 $1,377.1 $1,377.1 $1,465.7 $1,373.5 $1,373.5 $1,506.8 $1,506.8 $1,506.8 $1,506.8 $1,506.8 $1,506.8 $1,506.8 $1,506.8 $1,506.8 $1,506.8 2025 Cricket Pitches Unit Cost Park Name 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 ($/pitch) Courtice Memorial Park - - - - - - - - - - - - 1 1 $239,100 Total (#)- - - - - - - - - - - - - 1 1 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $239.1 $239.1 Washrooms Unit Cost Park Name 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 ($/unit) Clarington Fields Washroom Building (# of)- - - - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $150,000 East Beach Park Washroom Building - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $997,700 Orono Park Washroom Building 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $1,208,300 Rotary Park Washroom Building 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $639,680 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $997,700 Total (#)3 3 3 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 $2,845.7 $2,845.7 $2,845.7 $3,843.4 $3,843.4 $3,843.4 $3,843.4 $3,993.4 $3,993.4 $3,993.4 $3,993.4 $3,993.4 $3,993.4 $3,993.4 $3,993.4 Dog Parks Unit Cost Park Name 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 ($/unit) Bowmanville Dog Park - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $200,000 Courtice Dog Park - - - - - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $200,000 Newcastle Dog Park - - - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $200,000 Total (#)- - 1 1 1 1 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 $0.0 $0.0 $200.0 $200.0 $200.0 $200.0 $400.0 $400.0 $600.0 $600.0 $600.0 $600.0 $600.0 $600.0 $600.0 Page 360 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON INVENTORY OF CAPITAL ASSETS PARKS & INDOOR RECREATION OUTDOOR BUILDINGS & SPECIAL FACILITIES 2025 Shelters & Features UNIT COST Park Name 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 ($/unit) Andrew Parkette 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $72,700 Argent Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $72,700 Avondale Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $72,700 Barlow Court Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $135,100 Bathgate Commons - - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $69,400 Bond Head Boat Launch 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $72,700 Bond Head Park - - - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $115,800 Bowmanville Memorial Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $72,700 Bownmanville Valley Fish Channel - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $616,500 Brookhouse Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $74,400 Burketon Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 - - $40,300 Buttonshaw Parkette - - - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $80,100 Clarington Corners Park (Green Park)1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $72,700 Clarington Fields 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $225,100 Courtice Entry Feature 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $192,200 Enniskillen Park - - - - - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $70,700 Foster Creek Parkette 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $72,700 Foxhunt Parkette 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $39,900 Glenabbey Parkette 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $72,700 Harry Gay Park - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $23,300 Harvey Jones Park - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $102,200 Highland Park 1 1 1 1 1 - - - - - - - - - - $37,700 Ina Brown - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $31,100 Landerville Parkette 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $42,000 Longworth Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $72,700 Longworth Park (2015 shelter)- - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $94,000 Mearns Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $40,500 Moyse Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $72,700 Nelson Street Parkette - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $39,300 Newcastle Cenotaph 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $72,700 Northglen Park - - - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $186,300 Orono Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $72,700 Orono Streetscape 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $136,900 Pearce Farm Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $178,400 Penfound Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $36,500 Port Darlington Waterfront Park (East Beach)- - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $193,100 Prince William Parkette - - - - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $8,300 Rhonda Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $72,700 Rickard Neighbourhood Park - - - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $90,800 Rickard Neighbourhood Park (Fitness Equipment)- - - - - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $35,900 Rosswell Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $79,600 Rotary Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $72,700 Samuel Wilmot Nature Area 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $43,900 Scugog Street Neighbourhood Park - - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $87,600 Solina Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $72,700 Springfield Parkette - - - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $4,200 Squire Fletcher Parkette 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $29,800 Tooley's Mill Park - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $192,500 Trulls & Hwy 2 Parkette - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $43,300 Walbridge Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $72,700 West Side Drive Park 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $36,900 Westview Parkette 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $72,700 Total (#)33 33 35 38 40 43 48 49 51 51 51 51 51 50 50 Total ($000)$2,605.1 $2,605.1 $2,687.7 $2,844.3 $3,653.3 $4,059.7 $4,536.9 $4,545.2 $4,651.8 $4,651.8 $4,651.8 $4,651.8 $4,651.8 $4,611.5 $4,611.5 Page 361 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON INVENTORY OF CAPITAL ASSETS PARKS & INDOOR RECREATION OUTDOOR BUILDINGS & SPECIAL FACILITIES 2025 Parking Lots UNIT COST Park Name 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Paved Bond Head Boat Launch 750 750 750 750 750 750 750 750 750 750 750 750 750 750 750 $155 Bowmanville Memorial Park 756 756 756 756 756 756 756 756 756 756 756 756 756 756 756 $155 Clarington Fields 5,712 5,712 5,712 5,712 5,712 5,712 5,712 5,712 5,712 5,712 5,712 5,712 5,712 5,712 5,712 $155 Elephant Hill East 437 437 437 437 437 437 437 437 437 437 437 437 437 437 437 $155 Green Park - - - - 820 820 820 820 820 820 820 820 820 820 820 $155 Harry Gay Park - - - 880 880 880 880 880 880 880 880 880 880 880 880 $155 Orono Park 1,980 1,980 1,980 1,980 1,980 1,980 1,980 1,980 1,980 1,980 1,980 1,980 1,980 1,980 1,980 $155 Rosswell Park - - 861 861 861 861 861 861 861 861 861 861 861 861 861 $155 Tooley's Mill Park - - - - 190 190 190 190 190 190 190 190 190 190 190 $155 Tourism Office Park 1,054 1,054 1,054 1,054 1,054 1,054 1,054 1,054 1,054 1,054 1,054 1,054 1,054 1,054 1,054 $155 Gravel Baseline 1,080 1,080 1,080 1,080 1,080 1,080 1,080 1,080 1,080 1,080 1,080 1,080 1,080 1,080 1,080 $93 Bowmanville Boat Launch 2,280 2,280 2,280 2,280 2,280 2,280 2,280 2,280 2,280 2,280 2,280 2,280 2,280 2,280 2,280 $93 Bowmanville Leash Free Park - - 360 360 360 360 360 360 360 360 360 360 360 360 360 $93 Bowmanville Valley 2,035 2,035 2,035 2,035 2,035 2,035 2,035 2,035 2,035 2,035 2,035 2,035 2,035 2,035 2,035 $93 Burketon Park 448 448 448 448 448 448 448 448 448 448 448 448 448 448 448 $93 Courtice Memorial Park 825 825 825 825 825 825 825 825 825 825 825 825 825 825 825 $93 Darlington Hydro Soccer 9,020 9,020 9,020 9,020 9,020 9,020 9,020 9,020 9,020 9,020 9,020 9,020 9,020 9,020 9,020 $93 Elephant Hill West 763 763 763 763 763 763 763 763 763 763 763 763 763 763 763 $93 Harvey Jackson 640 640 640 640 640 640 640 640 640 640 640 640 640 640 640 $93 Lakefront the Glen 170 170 170 170 170 170 170 170 170 170 170 170 170 170 170 $93 Port Darlington West Beach - - 892 892 892 892 892 892 892 892 892 892 892 892 892 $93 Samuel Wilmot Nature Area 1,140 1,140 1,140 1,140 1,140 1,140 1,140 1,140 1,140 1,140 1,140 1,140 1,140 1,140 1,140 $93 Solina Park 3,500 3,500 3,500 3,500 3,500 3,500 3,500 3,500 3,500 3,500 3,500 3,500 3,500 3,500 3,500 $93 Soper Creek Park 1,140 1,140 1,140 1,140 1,140 1,140 1,140 1,140 1,140 1,140 1,140 1,140 1,140 1,140 1,140 $93 Tyrone Park 2,240 2,240 2,240 2,240 2,240 2,240 2,240 2,240 2,240 2,240 2,240 2,240 2,240 2,240 2,240 $93 Zion 1,100 1,100 1,100 1,100 1,100 1,100 1,100 1,100 1,100 1,100 1,100 1,100 1,100 1,100 1,100 $93 Total (m²)37,070 37,070 39,183 40,063 41,073 41,073 41,073 41,073 41,073 41,073 41,073 41,073 41,073 41,073 41,073 Total ($000)$4,113.9 $4,113.9 $4,364.1 $4,500.8 $4,657.7 $4,657.7 $4,657.7 $4,657.7 $4,657.7 $4,657.7 $4,657.7 $4,657.7 $4,657.7 $4,657.7 $4,657.7 Page 362 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON INVENTORY OF CAPITAL ASSETS PARKS & INDOOR RECREATION OUTDOOR BUILDINGS & SPECIAL FACILITIES 2025 Park Access Road UNIT COST Park Name 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Paved Baseline Park 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 $155 Bond Head Boat Launch 420 420 420 420 420 420 420 420 420 420 420 420 420 420 420 $155 Clarington Fields 560 560 560 560 560 560 560 560 560 560 560 560 560 560 560 $155 Elephant Hill East 133 133 133 133 133 133 133 133 133 133 133 133 133 133 133 $155 Harry Gay Park - - - 280 280 364 448 532 616 700 784 868 952 1,036 1,120 $155 Orono Park 630 630 630 630 630 630 630 630 630 630 630 630 630 630 630 $155 Rosswell Park - - 36 36 36 54 65 76 86 97 108 119 130 140 151 $155 Solina Park 168 168 168 168 168 168 168 168 168 168 168 168 168 168 168 $155 Soper Creek Park 2,645 2,645 2,645 2,645 2,645 2,645 2,645 2,645 2,645 2,645 2,645 2,645 2,645 2,645 2,645 $155 Tourism Office 143 143 143 143 143 143 143 143 143 143 143 143 143 143 143 $155 Gravel Baseline Park 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 $93 Bowmanville Boat Launch 854 854 854 854 854 854 854 854 854 854 854 854 854 854 854 $93 Bowmanville Valley 1,452 1,452 1,452 1,452 1,452 1,452 1,452 1,452 1,452 1,452 1,452 1,452 1,452 1,452 1,452 $93 Darlington Hydro Soccer 5,400 5,400 5,400 5,400 5,400 5,400 5,400 5,400 5,400 5,400 5,400 5,400 5,400 5,400 5,400 $93 Harvey Jackson 900 900 900 900 900 900 900 900 900 900 900 900 900 900 900 $93 Lakefront the Glen 77 77 77 77 77 77 77 77 77 77 77 77 77 77 77 $93 Port Darlington West Beach - - 360 360 360 540 648 756 864 972 1,080 1,188 1,296 1,404 1,512 $93 Samuel Wilmot Nature Area 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 $93 Tyrone Park 330 330 330 330 330 330 330 330 330 330 330 330 330 330 330 $93 Total (m²)14,301 14,301 14,697 14,977 14,977 15,259 15,462 15,665 15,868 16,070 16,273 16,476 16,679 16,882 17,084 Total ($000)$1,626.0 $1,626.0 $1,665.1 $1,708.6 $1,708.6 $1,741.2 $1,766.0 $1,790.7 $1,815.5 $1,840.3 $1,865.0 $1,889.8 $1,914.6 $1,939.4 $1,964.1 2025 Boat Launches UNIT COST Park Name 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 ($/launch) Bond Head 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $11,000 Bowmanville 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $515,000 Total (#)2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Total ($000)$526.0 $526.0 $526.0 $526.0 $526.0 $526.0 $526.0 $526.0 $526.0 $526.0 $526.0 $526.0 $526.0 $526.0 $526.0 Page 363 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON INVENTORY OF CAPITAL ASSETS PARKS & INDOOR RECREATION OUTDOOR BUILDINGS & SPECIAL FACILITIES 2025 Park Trails UNIT COST Park Name 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 ($/metre) Asphalt Bowmanville Boat Launch Waterfront Trail 465 465 465 465 465 465 465 465 465 465 465 465 465 465 465 $590 Bowmanville Valley 1,785 1,785 2,085 2,085 2,085 2,085 2,085 2,085 2,085 2,085 2,085 2,085 2,085 2,085 2,085 $590 Carveth Trail 600 600 600 600 600 600 600 600 600 600 600 600 600 600 600 $590 Lion's Memorial Trail 320 320 320 320 320 320 320 320 320 320 320 320 320 320 320 $590 Lion's Memorial Trail - - - - - - - - - - - 310 310 310 310 $590 Port of Newcastle Waterfront Trail 1,295 1,295 1,295 1,295 1,295 1,295 1,295 1,295 1,295 1,295 1,295 1,295 1,295 1,295 1,295 $590 Ridge Pine Park Waterfront Trail 1,630 1,630 1,630 1,630 1,630 1,630 1,630 1,630 1,630 1,630 1,630 1,630 1,630 1,630 1,630 $590 Soper Creek Trail 1,027 1,027 1,027 1,027 1,027 1,027 1,027 1,027 1,027 1,027 1,027 1,027 1,027 1,027 1,027 $590 Squire Fletcher 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 $590 Granular Courtice Millennium Trail 900 900 900 900 900 900 900 900 900 900 900 900 900 900 900 $120 Lion's Memorial Trail 310 310 310 310 310 310 310 310 310 310 310 - - - - Samuel Wilmot Nature Area 1,545 1,545 1,545 1,545 1,545 1,545 1,545 1,545 1,545 1,545 1,545 1,545 1,545 1,545 1,545 $120 Sydney Rutherford Trail 383 383 383 383 383 383 383 383 383 383 383 383 383 383 383 $120 Waterfront Trail 4,310 4,310 4,310 4,310 4,310 4,310 4,310 4,310 4,310 4,310 4,310 4,310 4,310 4,310 4,310 $120 Total (linear metres)14,665 14,665 14,965 14,965 14,965 14,965 14,965 14,965 14,965 14,965 14,965 14,965 14,965 14,965 14,965 Total ($000)$5,111.7 $5,111.7 $5,288.7 $5,288.7 $5,288.7 $5,288.7 $5,288.7 $5,288.7 $5,288.7 $5,288.7 $5,288.7 $5,471.6 $5,471.6 $5,471.6 $5,471.6 Page 364 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON INVENTORY OF CAPITAL ASSETS PARKS & INDOOR RECREATION OUTDOOR BUILDINGS & SPECIAL FACILITIES 2025 Park Bridges UNIT COST Park Name 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 ($/bridge) Long Span Bowmanville Boat Launch Waterfront Trail 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $433,100 Bowmanville Valley 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 $322,400 Courtice Millennium Trail 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $135,400 Farewell Creek Trail - - - - - - - - 1 1 1 1 3 3 3 $146,100 Gailbraith Court Bridge - - - - - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $209,100 Glenabbey Parkette 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $452,800 Ridge Pine Park Bridge 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 $401,100 Samuel Wilmot Nature Area 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 $272,200 West Side Park Ped. Bridge - - - - - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $255,100 Short Span Bowmanville Valley Fish By-pass/ Platform - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $238,900 Foxhunt Parkette 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $76,800 Graham Creek Pedestrian Bridge - - - - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Old Kingston Road Ped. Bridge - Courtice 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $199,700 Orono Park 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 $114,700 Soper Creek Trail 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 $144,000 Squire Fletcher Parkette 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $92,700 Sydney Rutherford Trail 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $109,000 Total (#)16 16 17 17 18 18 18 20 23 23 23 23 25 25 25 Total ($000)$3,528.4 $3,528.4 $3,850.8 $3,850.8 $4,089.7 $4,089.7 $4,089.7 $4,361.9 $4,972.2 $4,972.2 $4,972.2 $4,972.2 $5,264.4 $5,264.4 $5,264.4 Page 365 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON INVENTORY OF CAPITAL ASSETS PARKS & INDOOR RECREATION OUTDOOR BUILDINGS & SPECIAL FACILITIES 2025 Misc Equip & Special Features UNIT COST Park Name 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 ($/items) Outdoor Fitness Equipment Rickard Neighbourhood Park Fitness Equipment - - - - - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $95,000 South Courtice Outdoor Fitness Equipment - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1 $95,000 Rickard Neighbourhood Park - Inclined Crunch Bench - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - $8,400 Rickard Neighbourhood Park - Pullup Bars - - - - - - - - 1 - - - - - - $8,400 Fountains / Monuments Newcastle Town Hall - Fountain 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $22,800 Light Armoured Vehicle Monument - - - - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $68,100 Scoreboards Clarington Fields Scoreboard - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1 1 $26,500 Clarington Fields Scoreboard 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 $52,000 Cricket Equipment Storage Container - - - - - - - - - - - - 1 1 1 $5,500 Cricket Matting - - - - - - - - - - - - 1 1 1 $7,400 Total (#)3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 6 5 5 5 7 8 9 Total ($000)$126.8 $126.8 $126.8 $126.8 $126.8 $126.8 $126.8 $194.9 $298.3 $289.9 $289.9 $289.9 $302.8 $329.3 $424.3 Page 366 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON CALCULATION OF SERVICE LEVELS PARKS & INDOOR RECREATION 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Historic Population 83,157 84,548 85,990 87,457 88,949 90,466 92,010 93,821 95,667 97,550 99,470 101,427 103,359 105,328 107,334 INVENTORY SUMMARY ($000) Indoor Recreation $381,296.5 $381,296.5 $381,296.5 $381,296.5 $381,296.5 $380,496.5 $380,496.5 $380,496.5 $380,599.2 $380,599.2 $380,599.2 $380,599.2 $380,599.2 $380,599.2 $380,599.2 Parkland $36,915.5 $37,009.1 $37,518.8 $38,210.6 $38,294.6 $38,294.6 $38,294.6 $38,294.6 $38,294.6 $38,294.6 $38,294.6 $38,294.6 $38,847.1 $39,190.3 $39,606.1 Park Facilities $39,746.3 $39,746.3 $40,248.0 $41,881.7 $42,123.3 $45,360.5 $46,174.9 $46,748.2 $47,887.4 $47,887.4 $46,930.1 $47,156.9 $47,417.6 $48,997.7 $50,729.4 Special Facilities $17,638.0 $17,638.0 $18,509.2 $18,846.0 $20,050.8 $20,489.8 $20,991.8 $21,365.2 $22,210.2 $22,226.6 $22,251.4 $22,459.0 $22,788.9 $22,799.9 $22,919.6 Total ($000)$475,596.2 $475,689.8 $477,572.5 $480,234.8 $481,765.2 $484,641.3 $485,957.7 $486,904.4 $488,991.4 $489,007.8 $488,075.2 $488,509.7 $489,652.8 $491,587.1 $493,854.3 Average SERVICE LEVEL ($/capita)Service Level Indoor Recreation $4,585.26 $4,509.82 $4,434.20 $4,359.82 $4,286.69 $4,205.96 $4,135.38 $4,055.56 $3,978.38 $3,901.58 $3,826.27 $3,752.44 $3,682.30 $3,613.47 $3,545.93 $4,058.20 Parkland $443.93 $437.73 $436.32 $436.91 $430.52 $423.30 $416.20 $408.17 $400.29 $392.56 $384.99 $377.56 $375.85 $372.08 $369.00 $407.03 Park Facilities $477.97 $470.10 $468.05 $478.88 $473.57 $501.41 $501.85 $498.27 $500.56 $490.90 $471.80 $464.93 $458.77 $465.19 $472.63 $479.66 Special Facilities $212.10 $208.61 $215.25 $215.49 $225.42 $226.49 $228.15 $227.72 $232.16 $227.85 $223.70 $221.43 $220.48 $216.47 $213.54 $220.99 Total ($/capita)$5,719.26 $5,626.27 $5,553.81 $5,491.10 $5,416.20 $5,357.17 $5,281.57 $5,189.72 $5,111.39 $5,012.89 $4,906.76 $4,816.37 $4,737.40 $4,667.20 $4,601.10 $5,165.88 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON CALCULATION OF MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE PARKS & INDOOR RECREATION 15-Year Funding Envelope Calculation 15 Year Average Service Level (2010-2024)$5,165.88 Net Population Growth (2025-2034)28,202 Maximum Allowable Funding Envelope $145,688,142 Page 367 APPENDIX B.3 TABLE 2 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON Gross Grants/Net Total Service Project Description Project Municipal %$DC Eligible Available 2025 Post Cost Recoveries Cost Costs DC Reserves 2034 2034 3.0 PARKS & INDOOR RECREATION 3.1 South Bowmanville Recreation Centre (Phase 1) - Debt 3.1.1 Principal Payment - DC Eligible Share Only 2025 -2025 1,484,700$ -$ 1,484,700$ 0%-$ 1,484,700$ 1,484,700$ -$ -$ 3.1.2 Principal Payment - DC Eligible Share Only 2026 -2026 1,537,900$ -$ 1,537,900$ 0%-$ 1,537,900$ 1,116,609$ 421,291$ -$ 3.1.3 Principal Payment - DC Eligible Share Only 2027 -2027 1,589,700$ -$ 1,589,700$ 0%-$ 1,589,700$ -$ 1,589,700$ -$ 3.1.4 Principal Payment - DC Eligible Share Only 2028 -2028 1,645,000$ -$ 1,645,000$ 0%-$ 1,645,000$ -$ 1,645,000$ -$ 3.1.5 Principal Payment - DC Eligible Share Only 2029 -2029 1,703,100$ -$ 1,703,100$ 0%-$ 1,703,100$ -$ 1,703,100$ -$ 3.1.6 Principal Payment - DC Eligible Share Only 2030 -2030 1,766,800$ -$ 1,766,800$ 0%-$ 1,766,800$ -$ 1,766,800$ -$ 3.1.7 Principal Payment - DC Eligible Share Only 2031 -2031 1,831,200$ -$ 1,831,200$ 0%-$ 1,831,200$ -$ 1,831,200$ -$ 3.1.8 Principal Payment - DC Eligible Share Only 2032 -2032 1,901,200$ -$ 1,901,200$ 0%-$ 1,901,200$ -$ 1,901,200$ -$ 3.1.9 Principal Payment - DC Eligible Share Only 2033 -2033 1,970,500$ -$ 1,970,500$ 0%-$ 1,970,500$ -$ 1,970,500$ -$ 3.1.10 Principal Payment - DC Eligible Share Only 2034 -2034 21,678,239$ -$ 21,678,239$ 0%-$ 21,678,239$ -$ 10,839,120$ 10,839,120$ Subtotal South Bowmanville Recreation Centre (Phase 1) - Debt 37,108,339$ -$ 37,108,339$ -$ 37,108,339$ 2,601,309$ 23,667,910$ 10,839,120$ 3.2 South Bowmanville Recreation Centre (Phase 1) - Debt 3.2.1 Principal Payment - DC Eligible Share Only 2026 -2026 123,764$ -$ 123,764$ 0%-$ 123,764$ 123,764$ -$ -$ 3.2.2 Principal Payment - DC Eligible Share Only 2027 -2027 128,096$ -$ 128,096$ 0%-$ 128,096$ -$ 128,096$ -$ 3.2.3 Principal Payment - DC Eligible Share Only 2028 -2028 132,579$ -$ 132,579$ 0%-$ 132,579$ -$ 132,579$ -$ 3.2.4 Principal Payment - DC Eligible Share Only 2029 -2029 137,219$ -$ 137,219$ 0%-$ 137,219$ -$ 137,219$ -$ 3.2.5 Principal Payment - DC Eligible Share Only 2030 -2030 142,022$ -$ 142,022$ 0%-$ 142,022$ -$ 142,022$ -$ 3.2.6 Principal Payment - DC Eligible Share Only 2031 -2031 146,993$ -$ 146,993$ 0%-$ 146,993$ -$ 146,993$ -$ 3.2.7 Principal Payment - DC Eligible Share Only 2032 -2032 152,137$ -$ 152,137$ 0%-$ 152,137$ -$ 152,137$ -$ 3.2.8 Principal Payment - DC Eligible Share Only 2033 -2033 157,462$ -$ 157,462$ 0%-$ 157,462$ -$ 157,462$ -$ 3.2.9 Principal Payment - DC Eligible Share Only 2034 -2034 1,955,679$ -$ 1,955,679$ 0%-$ 1,955,679$ -$ -$ 1,955,679$ Subtotal South Bowmanville Recreation Centre (Phase 1) - Debt 3,075,950$ -$ 3,075,950$ -$ 3,075,950$ 123,764$ 996,507$ 1,955,679$ DEVELOPMENT-RELATED CAPITAL PROGRAM Timing Ineligible Costs DC Eligible Costs Page 368 APPENDIX B.3 TABLE 2 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON Gross Grants/Net Total Service Project Description Project Municipal %$DC Eligible Available 2025 Post Cost Recoveries Cost Costs DC Reserves 2034 2034 3.3 Outdoor Rinks - Courtice Complex & Diane Hamre - Debt 3.3.1 Principal Payment - DC Eligible Share Only 2025 -2025 240,000$ -$ 240,000$ 0%-$ 240,000$ 240,000$ -$ -$ 3.3.2 Principal Payment - DC Eligible Share Only 2026 -2026 283,000$ -$ 283,000$ 0%-$ 283,000$ -$ 283,000$ -$ 3.3.3 Principal Payment - DC Eligible Share Only 2027 -2027 293,000$ -$ 293,000$ 0%-$ 293,000$ -$ 293,000$ -$ 3.3.4 Principal Payment - DC Eligible Share Only 2028 -2028 303,000$ -$ 303,000$ 0%-$ 303,000$ -$ 303,000$ -$ 3.3.5 Principal Payment - DC Eligible Share Only 2029 -2029 313,000$ -$ 313,000$ 0%-$ 313,000$ -$ 313,000$ -$ 3.3.6 Principal Payment - DC Eligible Share Only 2030 -2030 324,000$ -$ 324,000$ 0%-$ 324,000$ -$ 324,000$ -$ 3.3.7 Principal Payment - DC Eligible Share Only 2031 -2031 336,000$ -$ 336,000$ 0%-$ 336,000$ -$ 336,000$ -$ 3.3.8 Principal Payment - DC Eligible Share Only 2032 -2032 349,000$ -$ 349,000$ 0%-$ 349,000$ -$ 349,000$ -$ 3.3.9 Principal Payment - DC Eligible Share Only 2033 -2033 363,000$ -$ 363,000$ 0%-$ 363,000$ -$ 363,000$ -$ 3.3.10 Principal Payment - DC Eligible Share Only 2034 -2034 4,335,258$ -$ 4,335,258$ 0%-$ 4,335,258$ -$ -$ 4,335,258$ Subtotal Outdoor Rinks - Courtice Complex & Diane Hamre - Debt 7,139,258$ -$ 7,139,258$ -$ 7,139,258$ 240,000$ 2,564,000$ 4,335,258$ 3.4 Newcastle Community Park - Debt 3.4.1 Principal Payment - DC Eligible Share Only 2025 -2025 117,000$ -$ 117,000$ 0%-$ 117,000$ 117,000$ -$ -$ 3.4.2 Principal Payment - DC Eligible Share Only 2026 -2026 114,000$ -$ 114,000$ 0%-$ 114,000$ -$ 114,000$ -$ 3.4.3 Principal Payment - DC Eligible Share Only 2027 -2027 118,000$ -$ 118,000$ 0%-$ 118,000$ -$ 118,000$ -$ 3.4.4 Principal Payment - DC Eligible Share Only 2028 -2028 122,000$ -$ 122,000$ 0%-$ 122,000$ -$ 122,000$ -$ 3.4.5 Principal Payment - DC Eligible Share Only 2029 -2029 126,000$ -$ 126,000$ 0%-$ 126,000$ -$ 126,000$ -$ 3.4.6 Principal Payment - DC Eligible Share Only 2030 -2030 130,000$ -$ 130,000$ 0%-$ 130,000$ -$ 130,000$ -$ 3.4.7 Principal Payment - DC Eligible Share Only 2031 -2031 135,000$ -$ 135,000$ 0%-$ 135,000$ -$ 135,000$ -$ 3.4.8 Principal Payment - DC Eligible Share Only 2032 -2032 140,000$ -$ 140,000$ 0%-$ 140,000$ -$ 140,000$ -$ 3.4.9 Principal Payment - DC Eligible Share Only 2033 -2033 145,000$ -$ 145,000$ 0%-$ 145,000$ -$ 145,000$ -$ 3.4.10 Principal Payment - DC Eligible Share Only 2034 -2034 1,727,470$ -$ 1,727,470$ 0%-$ 1,727,470$ -$ -$ 1,727,470$ Subtotal Newcastle Community Park - Debt 2,874,470$ -$ 2,874,470$ -$ 2,874,470$ 117,000$ 1,030,000$ 1,727,470$ Page 369 APPENDIX B.3 TABLE 2 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON Gross Grants/Net Total Service Project Description Project Municipal %$DC Eligible Available 2025 Post Cost Recoveries Cost Costs DC Reserves 2034 2034 3.5 Indoor Recreation Buildings 3.5.1 Courtice Community Complex - Aquatic Expansion 2028 -2030 8,300,000$ -$ 8,300,000$ 5%436,842$ 7,863,158$ -$ 7,863,158$ -$ 3.5.2 Diane Hamre Recreation Complex - Phase 2 Exp.2034 -2034 59,062,500$ -$ 59,062,500$ 0%-$ 59,062,500$ -$ -$ 59,062,500$ Subtotal Indoor Recreation Buildings 67,362,500$ -$ 67,362,500$ 436,842$ 66,925,658$ -$ 7,863,158$ 59,062,500$ 3.6 PCRMP - Indoor Recreation Projects 3.6.1 Indoor Walking Track - South Courtice Arena 2025 -2034 1,875,000$ -$ 1,875,000$ 0%-$ 1,875,000$ -$ 1,687,500$ 187,500$ 3.6.3 Indoor Acquatic Centre - South Bowmanville Facility Phase 2 2027 -2028 56,805,000$ 10,000,000$ 46,805,000$ 0%-$ 46,805,000$ -$ Subtotal PCRMP - Indoor Recreation Projects 125,105,000$ 10,000,000$ 115,105,000$ -$ 115,105,000$ -$ 30,393,232$ 84,711,768$ 3.7 Park Development 3.7.1 South Bowmanville Rec Centre Park 2025 -2026 1,500,000$ -$ 1,500,000$ 0%-$ 1,500,000$ 1,500,000$ -$ -$ 3.7.2 Newtonville Estates Parkette 2025 -2025 250,000$ -$ 250,000$ 0%-$ 250,000$ -$ 250,000$ -$ 3.7.3 Northglen Phase 8 Parkette 2026 -2027 250,000$ -$ 250,000$ 0%-$ 250,000$ -$ 250,000$ -$ 3.7.4 Foster Creek Parkette (Given Rd and Highway 2)2026 -2026 150,000$ -$ 150,000$ 0%-$ 150,000$ -$ 150,000$ -$ 3.7.5 Brookhill Parkette (TonnolDunbury)2028 -2028 300,000$ -$ 300,000$ 0%-$ 300,000$ -$ 300,000$ -$ 3.7.6 Brookhill Parkette 1 2027 -2027 300,000$ -$ 300,000$ 0%-$ 300,000$ -$ 300,000$ -$ 3.7.7 Brookhill Parkette (west of Bowmanville Ck, north of Longworth Ave)2027 -2027 300,000$ -$ 300,000$ 0%-$ 300,000$ -$ 300,000$ -$ 3.7.8 Foster Creek Neighbourhood Park West (Newcastle Heritage Park)2025 -2026 650,000$ -$ 650,000$ 0%-$ 650,000$ -$ 650,000$ -$ 3.7.9 Clarington Fields Soccer 2027 -2028 2,700,000$ -$ 2,700,000$ 0%-$ 2,700,000$ -$ 2,700,000$ -$ 3.7.10 Bowmanville West Parkette (Goodyear)2028 -2028 300,000$ -$ 300,000$ 0%-$ 300,000$ -$ 300,000$ -$ 3.7.11 Southwest Courtice Neighbourhood Park 2026 -2026 650,000$ -$ 650,000$ 0%-$ 650,000$ -$ 650,000$ -$ 3.7.12 Southeast Courtice Neighbourhood Park (Tribute Courtice)2029 -2029 650,000$ -$ 650,000$ 0%-$ 650,000$ -$ 650,000$ -$ 3.7.13 Southeast Courtice Neighbourhood Park (Tribute King)2029 -2029 650,000$ -$ 650,000$ 0%-$ 650,000$ -$ 650,000$ -$ 3.7.14 Courtice Waterfront Park Phase 1 2027 -2027 500,000$ -$ 500,000$ 0%-$ 500,000$ -$ 500,000$ -$ 3.7.15 Port Darlington Neighbourhood Park 2027 -2027 1,500,000$ -$ 1,500,000$ 0%-$ 1,500,000$ -$ 1,500,000$ -$ 3.7.16 Port Darlington East Beach Phase 2 2027 -2027 600,000$ -$ 600,000$ 0%-$ 600,000$ -$ 600,000$ -$ 3.7.17 Brookhill Parkette 2 2029 -2029 300,000$ -$ 300,000$ 0%-$ 300,000$ -$ 300,000$ -$ 3.7.18 Newcastle Waterfront Park Phase 2 2026 -2026 600,000$ -$ 600,000$ 0%-$ 600,000$ -$ 600,000$ -$ 3.7.19 North Newcastle Neighbourhood Park 2 2028 -2028 650,000$ -$ 650,000$ 0%-$ 650,000$ -$ 650,000$ -$ Page 370 APPENDIX B.3 TABLE 2 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON Gross Grants/Net Total Service Project Description Project Municipal %$DC Eligible Available 2025 Post Cost Recoveries Cost Costs DC Reserves 2034 2034 3.7.20 Southwest Courtice Parkette 2027 -2027 300,000$ -$ 300,000$ 0%-$ 300,000$ -$ 300,000$ -$ 3.7.21 Southwest Courtice Community Park 2030 -2034 650,000$ -$ 650,000$ 0%-$ 650,000$ -$ 487,500$ 162,500$ 3.7.22 Soper Hills Neighbourhood Park 2026 -2026 650,000$ -$ 650,000$ 0%-$ 650,000$ -$ 650,000$ -$ 3.7.23 Ridge Pine Park Bennet Road 2026 -2026 1,500,000$ -$ 1,500,000$ 0%-$ 1,500,000$ -$ 1,500,000$ -$ 3.7.24 Brookhill Neighbourhood Park 3 (Parkette)2026 -2026 1,500,000$ -$ 1,500,000$ 0%-$ 1,500,000$ -$ 1,500,000$ -$ 3.7.25 Soper Springs Neighbourhood Park 2026 -2026 650,000$ -$ 650,000$ 0%-$ 650,000$ -$ 650,000$ -$ 3.7.26 Courtice Waterfront Park Phase 2 2028 -2028 1,000,000$ -$ 1,000,000$ 0%-$ 1,000,000$ -$ 1,000,000$ -$ 3.7.27 Port Darlington Waterfront Park West Beach Phase 2 2027 -2027 500,000$ -$ 500,000$ 0%-$ 500,000$ -$ 500,000$ -$ 3.7.28 South Courtice Soccer Field Phase 3 2028 -2029 1,000,000$ -$ 1,000,000$ 0%-$ 1,000,000$ -$ 1,000,000$ -$ 3.7.29 Neighbourhood Park located west of Clarington Blvd., south of future Longworth 2029 -2029 1,500,000$ -$ 1,500,000$ 0%-$ 1,500,000$ -$ 1,500,000$ -$ 3.7.30 Soper Hills Community Park - Concession and Lambs 2029 -2029 2,000,000$ -$ 2,000,000$ 0%-$ 2,000,000$ -$ 2,000,000$ -$ 3.7.31 Jury Land Park Development 2029 -2029 750,000$ -$ 750,000$ 0%-$ 750,000$ -$ 750,000$ -$ 3.7.32 Bowmanville Zoo Park Design and Initial Construction 2025 -2025 1,100,000$ -$ 1,100,000$ 0%-$ 1,100,000$ -$ 1,100,000$ -$ 3.7.33 Bowmanville Zoo Park Future Phases 2027 -2034 20,000,000$ -$ 20,000,000$ 10%2,000,000$ 18,000,000$ -$ 15,300,000$ 2,700,000$ Subtotal Park Development 45,900,000$ -$ 45,900,000$ 2,000,000$ 43,900,000$ 1,500,000$ 39,537,500$ 2,862,500$ 3.8 PRCMP - Facilities and Equipment to 2036 3.8.1 Outdoor Rectangular Fields 2025 -2034 10,500,000$ -$ 10,500,000$ 0%-$ 10,500,000$ -$ 8,750,000$ 1,750,000$ 3.8.2 Ball Diamonds 2025 -2034 5,500,000$ -$ 5,500,000$ 0%-$ 5,500,000$ -$ 4,583,333$ 916,667$ 3.8.3 Cricket Field 2025 -2034 350,000$ -$ 350,000$ 0%-$ 350,000$ -$ 291,667$ 58,333$ 3.8.4 17 Outdoor Tennis Fields 2025 -2034 2,550,000$ -$ 2,550,000$ 0%-$ 2,550,000$ -$ 2,125,000$ 425,000$ 3.8.5 20 Outdoor Pickleball Courts 2025 -2034 2,000,000$ -$ 2,000,000$ 0%-$ 2,000,000$ -$ 1,666,667$ 333,333$ 3.8.6 10 Basketball Courts 2025 -2034 1,000,000$ -$ 1,000,000$ 0%-$ 1,000,000$ -$ 833,333$ 166,667$ 3.8.7 14 Outdoor Splash Pads 2025 -2034 7,000,000$ -$ 7,000,000$ 39%2,750,000$ 4,250,000$ -$ 3,541,667$ 708,333$ 3.8.8 Cooling Stations 2025 -2034 700,000$ -$ 700,000$ 0%-$ 700,000$ -$ 583,333$ 116,667$ 3.8.9 5 Small-Scale Skate Zones 2025 -2034 600,000$ -$ 600,000$ 0%-$ 600,000$ -$ 500,000$ 100,000$ 3.8.10 Leash-Free Dog Park 2025 -2034 140,000$ -$ 140,000$ 0%-$ 140,000$ -$ 116,667$ 23,333$ 3.8.11 2 Compact Leash-Free Dog Parks 2025 -2034 200,000$ -$ 200,000$ 0%-$ 200,000$ -$ 166,667$ 33,333$ 3.8.12 Community Garden 2025 -2034 175,000$ -$ 175,000$ 0%-$ 175,000$ -$ 145,833$ 29,167$ 3.8.13 4 Outdoor Fitness Equipment 2025 -2034 800,000$ -$ 800,000$ 0%-$ 800,000$ -$ 666,667$ 133,333$ 3.8.14 30 Playgrounds 2025 -2034 12,000,000$ -$ 12,000,000$ 0%-$ 12,000,000$ -$ 10,000,000$ 2,000,000$ Subtotal PRCMP - Facilities and Equipment to 2036 43,515,000$ -$ 43,515,000$ 2,750,000$ 40,765,000$ -$ 33,970,834$ 6,794,166$ Page 371 APPENDIX B.3 TABLE 2 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON Gross Grants/Net Total Service Project Description Project Municipal %$DC Eligible Available 2025 Post Cost Recoveries Cost Costs DC Reserves 2034 2034 3.9 Park Trails 3.9.1 1505 Bowmanville Ave to Rhonda Park Trail 2025 -2025 40,000$ -$ 40,000$ 0%-$ 40,000$ 40,000$ -$ -$ 3.9.2 Farewell Creek Trail Phase 2 (Townline Rd to Phase 1 Trail)2026 -2026 450,000$ -$ 450,000$ 0%-$ 450,000$ -$ 450,000$ -$ 3.9.3 Foster Creek Trail (Hwy 2 to north of Grady Drive)2026 -2027 450,000$ -$ 450,000$ 0%-$ 450,000$ -$ 450,000$ -$ 3.9.4 Brookhill Trail (Stevens Road to Green Road)2026 -2026 400,000$ -$ 400,000$ 0%-$ 400,000$ -$ 400,000$ -$ 3.9.5 Waterfront Trail (Darlington Park Rd to Waterfront)2027 -2028 350,000$ -$ 350,000$ 0%-$ 350,000$ -$ 350,000$ -$ 3.9.6 Waterfront Trail extension and CN level crossing at Crago lands 2030 -2030 1,205,000$ -$ 1,205,000$ 0%-$ 1,205,000$ -$ 1,205,000$ -$ 3.9.7 Bowmanville Valley Trail (King to Nash)2026 -2026 650,000$ -$ 650,000$ 0%-$ 650,000$ -$ 650,000$ -$ 3.9.8 Black Creek Trait (Centerfield to Trulls)2028 -2028 1,080,000$ -$ 1,080,000$ 0%-$ 1,080,000$ -$ 1,080,000$ -$ 3.9.9 Robinson Creek Trail (Southfield to Prestonvale)2028 -2028 1,080,000$ -$ 1,080,000$ 0%-$ 1,080,000$ -$ 1,080,000$ -$ 3.9.10 Soper Creek Trail (Cotton to Conc. Rd. 3)2034 -2034 1,200,000$ -$ 1,200,000$ 0%-$ 1,200,000$ -$ -$ 1,200,000$ Subtotal Park Trails 6,905,000$ -$ 6,905,000$ -$ 6,905,000$ 40,000$ 5,665,000$ 1,200,000$ TOTAL PARKS & INDOOR RECREATION 338,985,517$ 10,000,000$ 328,985,517$ 5,186,842$ 323,798,675$ 4,622,073$ 145,688,142$ 173,488,461$ Residential Development Charge Calculation Residential Share of 2025-2034 DC Eligible Costs 100%$145,688,142 2025-2034 Net Funding Envelope $145,688,142 10 Year Growth in Population in New Units 35,923 Unadjusted Development Charge Per Capita $4,055.57 Reserve Fund Balance Balance as at Dec 31, 2024 $4,622,073 Non-Residential Development Charge Calculation Non-Residential Share of 2025-2034 DC Eligible Costs 0%$0 10 Year Growth in Square Metres 547,703 Unadjusted Development Charge Per Square Metre $0.00 Page 372 APPENDIX B.4 TABLE 1 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON DEVELOPMENT-RELATED CAPITAL PROGRAM Gross Grants/Net Total Service Project Description Project Municipal %$DC Eligible Available 2025 Post Cost Recoveries Cost Costs DC Reserves 2034 2034 4.0 GENERAL GOVERNMENT 4.1 Planning and Development 4.1.1 Development Charges Background Study 2025 -2025 138,500$ -$ 138,500$ 0%-$ 138,500$ 138,500$ -$ -$ 4.1.2 Courtice GO Station 2025 -2025 75,000$ -$ 75,000$ 10%7,500$ 67,500$ 67,500$ -$ -$ 4.1.3 Bowmanville GO Station 2025 -2025 75,000$ -$ 75,000$ 10%7,500$ 67,500$ 67,500$ -$ -$ 4.1.4 Population/Employment Demographic Update 2025 -2026 50,000$ -$ 50,000$ 0%-$ 50,000$ 22,526$ 27,475$ -$ 4.1.5 Commercial Policy Review 2025 -2027 185,400$ -$ 185,400$ 20%37,080$ 148,320$ -$ 148,320$ -$ 4.1.6 Municipal Secondary Plan 1 2028 -2030 500,000$ -$ 500,000$ 0%-$ 500,000$ -$ 500,000$ -$ 4.1.7 Municipal Secondary Plan 2 2029 -2031 500,000$ -$ 500,000$ 0%-$ 500,000$ -$ 500,000$ -$ 4.1.8 Municipal Secondary Plan 3 2030 -2032 500,000$ -$ 500,000$ 0%-$ 500,000$ -$ 500,000$ -$ 4.1.9 Municipal Secondary Plan 4 2031 -2033 500,000$ -$ 500,000$ 0%-$ 500,000$ -$ 500,000$ -$ 4.1.10 Municipal Secondary Plan Updates 2028 -2032 750,000$ -$ 750,000$ 0%-$ 750,000$ -$ 750,000$ -$ 4.1.11 Subwatershed Study/MESP 1 2027 -2029 500,000$ -$ 500,000$ 50%250,000$ 250,000$ -$ 250,000$ -$ 4.1.12 Subwatershed Study/MESP 2 2028 -2030 500,000$ -$ 500,000$ 50%250,000$ 250,000$ -$ 250,000$ -$ 4.1.13 Subwatershed Study/MESP 3 2029 2031 500,000$ -$ 500,000$ 50%250,000$ 250,000$ -$ 250,000$ -$ 4.1.14 Subwatershed Study/MESP 4 2030 -2032 500,000$ -$ 500,000$ 50%250,000$ 250,000$ -$ 250,000$ -$ 4.1.15 Other Plan Implementation Studies/Master Plans 2028 -2030 250,000$ -$ 250,000$ 50%125,000$ 125,000$ -$ 125,000$ -$ 4.1.16 Offical Plan Review 2032 -2036 1,186,300$ -$ 1,186,300$ 20%237,260$ 949,040$ -$ 474,520$ 474,520$ 4.1.17 Transportation Master Plan review/update 2032 -2036 1,000,000$ -$ 1,000,000$ 0%-$ 1,000,000$ -$ 500,000$ 500,000$ 4.1.18 Population/Employment Demographic Update 2030 -2031 50,000$ -$ 50,000$ 0%-$ 50,000$ -$ 50,000$ -$ 4.1.19 Heritage Studies 2027 -2030 222,500$ -$ 222,500$ 85%189,125$ 33,375$ -$ 33,375$ -$ 4.1.20 Courtice Waterfront Park Implementation Design 2026 -2027 370,800$ -$ 370,800$ 50%185,400$ 185,400$ -$ 185,400$ -$ 4.1.21 Zoning By-Law - Part 1 2026 -2027 216,700$ -$ 216,700$ 20%43,340$ 173,360$ -$ 173,360$ -$ 4.1.22 Zoning By-Law - Part 2 2025 -2025 216,700$ -$ 216,700$ 20%43,340$ 173,360$ -$ 173,360$ -$ 4.1.23 Intensification Guidelines 2026 -2028 173,400$ -$ 173,400$ 20%34,680$ 138,720$ -$ 138,720$ -$ 4.1.24 Landscape and Amenities Design Guidelines 2027 -2027 111,200$ -$ 111,200$ 28%31,136$ 80,064$ -$ 80,064$ -$ 4.1.25 Architectural Design Guidelines Update 2025 -2025 103,800$ -$ 103,800$ 0%-$ 103,800$ -$ 103,800$ -$ 4.1.26 Development Charge Background Study 2031 -2031 138,500$ -$ 138,500$ 0%-$ 138,500$ -$ 138,500$ -$ 4.1.27 On-going Consulting and Legal Advice for Planning & Development Studies 2028 -2028 300,000$ -$ 300,000$ 21%62,532$ 237,468$ -$ 237,468$ -$ Subtotal Planning and Development 9,613,800$ -$ 9,613,800$ 2,003,893$ 7,609,907$ 296,026$ 6,339,362$ 974,520$ Ineligible Costs DC Eligible Costs Timing Page 373 APPENDIX B.4 TABLE 1 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON DEVELOPMENT-RELATED CAPITAL PROGRAM Gross Grants/Net Total Service Project Description Project Municipal %$DC Eligible Available 2025 Post Cost Recoveries Cost Costs DC Reserves 2034 2034 4.2.1 Service Review 2025 -2025 60,000$ -$ 60,000$ 90%54,000$ 6,000$ 6,000$ -$ -$ 4.2.2 Parks, Recreation, and Culture Master Plan 2025 -2025 31,250$ -$ 31,250$ 25%7,813$ 23,438$ 23,438$ -$ -$ Subtotal Library 91,250$ -$ 91,250$ 61,813$ 29,438$ 29,438$ -$ -$ 4.3 Emergency & Fire Services 4.3.1 Fire Master Plan and Location Study 2029 -2029 177,000$ -$ 177,000$ 0%-$ 177,000$ -$ 177,000$ -$ 4.3.2 Fire Master Plan and Location Study 2034 -2034 177,000$ -$ 177,000$ 0%-$ 177,000$ -$ 177,000$ -$ Subtotal Emergency & Fire Services 354,000$ -$ 354,000$ -$ 354,000$ -$ 354,000$ -$ 4.4 Parks & Indoor Recreation 4.4.1 Bowmanville Zoo Park 2025 -2025 62,000$ -$ 62,000$ 10%6,200$ 55,800$ 55,800$ -$ -$ 4.4.2 Accessible Playground Distribution Strategy 2025 -2026 50,000$ -$ 50,000$ 80%40,000$ 10,000$ -$ 10,000$ -$ 4.4.3 Parks Master Plan Update 2030 -2030 93,750$ -$ 93,750$ 0%-$ 93,750$ -$ 93,750$ -$ 4.4.4 Clarington Fields - Soccer Design 2026 -2026 135,000$ -$ 135,000$ 0%-$ 135,000$ -$ 135,000$ -$ 4.4.5 Lambs Road/Concession Street Land Needs Assessment 2030 -2030 100,000$ -$ 100,000$ 50%50,000$ 50,000$ -$ 50,000$ -$ Subtotal Parks & Indoor Recreation 440,750$ -$ 440,750$ 96,200$ 344,550$ 55,800$ 288,750$ -$ TOTAL GENERAL GOVERNMENT 10,499,800$ -$ 10,499,800$ 2,161,905$ 8,337,895$ 381,263$ 6,982,112$ 974,520$ Residential Development Charge Calculation Residential Share of 2025-2034 DC Eligible Costs 78%$5,439,065 Reserve Fund Balance 10 Year Growth in Population in New Units 35,923 Balance as at Dec 31, 2024 $381,263 Unadjusted Development Charge Per Capita $151.41 Non-Residential Development Charge Calculation Non-Residential Share of 2025-2034 DC Eligible Costs 22%$1,543,047 10 Year Growth in Square Metres 547,703 Unadjusted Development Charge Per Square Metre $2.82 Page 374 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON INVENTORY OF CAPITAL ASSETS SERVICES RELATED TO A HIGHWAY: OPERATIONS 2025 Buildings UNIT COST Facility Name 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 ($/sq. ft.) Clarington Fields Storage Building 1,350 1,350 1,350 1,350 1,350 1,350 1,350 1,350 1,350 1,350 1,350 1,350 1,350 1,350 1,350 $100 Hampton Operations Centre 14,812 14,812 14,812 14,812 14,812 14,812 14,812 14,812 14,812 14,812 14,812 14,812 14,812 14,812 14,812 $500 Hampton Storage Building (Sign Shed)1,152 1,152 1,152 1,152 1,152 1,152 1,152 1,152 1,152 1,152 1,152 1,152 1,152 1,152 1,152 $100 Hampton Quonset Hut - Old Scugog Road Hampton 2,450 2,450 2,450 2,450 2,450 2,450 2,450 2,450 2,450 2,450 2,450 2,450 2,450 2,450 2,450 $100 Hampton Salt Shed 1,232 1,232 1,232 1,232 1,232 1,232 1,232 1,232 1,232 1,232 1,232 1,232 1,232 1,232 1,232 $100 Hampton Sand Dome 11,035 11,035 11,035 11,035 11,035 11,035 11,035 11,035 11,035 11,035 11,035 11,035 11,035 11,035 11,035 $100 Hampton Storage Trailers 704 1,344 1,344 1,344 1,344 1,344 1,344 1,344 1,344 1,344 1,344 1,344 1,344 1,344 1,344 $100 Orono Operations Centre 5,122 5,122 5,122 5,122 5,122 5,122 5,122 5,122 5,122 5,122 5,122 5,122 5,122 5,122 5,122 $500 Orono Storage Building 1,423 1,423 1,423 1,423 1,423 1,423 1,423 1,423 1,423 1,423 1,423 1,423 1,423 1,423 1,423 $100 Orono Salt Shed 1,232 1,232 1,232 1,232 1,232 1,232 1,232 1,232 1,232 1,232 1,232 1,232 1,232 1,232 1,232 $100 Orono Sand Dome 11,035 11,035 11,035 11,035 11,035 11,035 11,035 11,035 11,035 11,035 11,035 11,035 11,035 11,035 11,035 $100 Parks Operations Depot (Depot 42)5,208 5,208 5,208 5,208 5,208 5,208 5,208 5,208 5,208 5,208 5,208 5,208 5,208 5,208 5,208 $500 Parks Operations Depot Sand Dome 8,210 8,210 8,210 8,210 8,210 8,210 8,210 8,210 8,210 8,210 8,210 8,210 8,210 8,210 8,210 $100 Total (sq.ft.)64,965 65,605 65,605 65,605 65,605 65,605 65,605 65,605 65,605 65,605 65,605 65,605 65,605 65,605 65,605 Total ($000)$16,553.3 $16,617.3 $16,617.3 $16,617.3 $16,617.3 $16,617.3 $16,617.3 $16,617.3 $16,617.3 $16,617.3 $16,617.3 $16,617.3 $16,617.3 $16,617.3 $16,617.3 Page 375 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON INVENTORY OF CAPITAL ASSETS SERVICES RELATED TO A HIGHWAY: OPERATIONS 2025 Land UNIT COST Facility Name 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 ($/ha) Building Services Expansion (Former Animal Services)0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 $1,620,000 Cemetery Office & Quonset Hut 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 $1,620,000 Hampton Operations Centre 3.22 3.22 3.22 3.22 3.22 3.22 3.22 3.22 3.22 3.22 3.22 3.22 3.22 3.22 3.22 $1,620,000 Hampton property Old Scugog Road (Quonset Hut)0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 $1,620,000 Orono Operations Depot 5.40 5.40 5.40 5.40 5.40 5.40 5.40 5.40 5.40 5.40 5.40 5.40 5.40 5.40 5.40 $1,620,000 Parks Operations Depot (Depot 42)5.30 5.30 5.30 5.30 5.30 5.30 5.30 5.30 5.30 5.30 5.30 5.30 5.30 5.30 5.30 $1,620,000 Total (ha)14.67 14.67 14.67 14.67 14.67 14.67 14.67 14.67 14.67 14.67 14.67 14.67 14.67 14.67 14.67 Total ($000)$23,765.4 $23,765.4 $23,765.4 $23,765.4 $23,765.4 $23,765.4 $23,765.4 $23,765.4 $23,765.4 $23,765.4 $23,765.4 $23,765.4 $23,765.4 $23,765.4 $23,765.4 2025 Parkings Lots, Access Roads & Other Paved Infrastructure UNIT COST Facility Name 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 ($/ha) Asphalt Hampton Operations Centre 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.57 $1,550,000 Orono Operations Depot 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 $1,550,000 Gravel Hampton Operations Centre 1.60 1.60 1.60 1.60 1.60 1.60 1.60 1.60 1.60 1.60 1.60 1.60 1.60 1.60 1.60 $930,000 Hampton property Old Scugog Road (Quonset Hut)0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 $930,000 Orono Operations Depot 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 $930,000 Parks Operations Depot (Depot 42)1.86 1.86 1.86 1.86 1.86 1.86 1.86 1.86 1.86 1.86 1.86 1.86 1.86 1.86 1.86 $930,000 Total (ha)5.53 5.53 5.53 5.53 5.53 5.53 5.53 5.53 5.53 5.53 5.53 5.53 5.53 5.53 5.53 Total ($000)$5,678.5 $5,678.5 $5,678.5 $5,678.5 $5,678.5 $5,678.5 $5,678.5 $5,678.5 $5,678.5 $5,678.5 $5,678.5 $5,678.5 $5,678.5 $5,678.5 $5,678.5 Equipment UNIT COST Facility Name 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 ($/item) Brine Tanks - - - - 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 $70,000 Fuel Tanks 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 $3,000 Hoist 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 $110,000 Total (ha)5 5 5 5 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 Total ($000)$229.0 $229.0 $229.0 $229.0 $509.0 $509.0 $509.0 $509.0 $509.0 $509.0 $509.0 $509.0 $509.0 $509.0 $509.0 Page 376 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON INVENTORY OF CAPITAL ASSETS SERVICES RELATED TO A HIGHWAY: OPERATIONS Furniture Facility Name 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Building Services Expansion (Former Animal Services)$10,200 $10,200 $10,200 $10,200 $10,200 $10,200 $10,200 $10,200 $10,200 $10,200 $10,200 $10,200 $10,200 $10,200 $10,200 Depot One - Hampton $395,000 $395,000 $395,000 $395,000 $395,000 $395,000 $395,000 $395,000 $395,000 $395,000 $395,000 $395,000 $395,000 $395,000 $395,000 Depot One - Storage Building Sign Shed $33,900 $33,900 $33,900 $33,900 $33,900 $33,900 $33,900 $33,900 $33,900 $33,900 $33,900 $33,900 $33,900 $33,900 $33,900 Depot Three - Orono Depot $54,700 $54,700 $54,700 $54,700 $54,700 $54,700 $54,700 $54,700 $54,700 $54,700 $54,700 $54,700 $54,700 $54,700 $54,700 Depot Three - Storage Building $27,400 $27,400 $27,400 $27,400 $27,400 $27,400 $27,400 $27,400 $27,400 $27,400 $27,400 $27,400 $27,400 $27,400 $27,400 Hampton property Old Scugog Road (Quonset Hut)$27,400 $27,400 $27,400 $27,400 $27,400 $27,400 $27,400 $27,400 $27,400 $27,400 $27,400 $27,400 $27,400 $27,400 $27,400 Miscellaneous Parks/Recreation & Cemetery $19,700 $19,700 $19,700 $19,700 $19,700 $19,700 $19,700 $19,700 $19,700 $19,700 $19,700 $19,700 $19,700 $19,700 $19,700 Parks Operations Depot (Depot 42)$9,800 $9,800 $9,800 $9,800 $9,800 $9,800 $9,800 $9,800 $9,800 $9,800 $9,800 $9,800 $9,800 $9,800 $9,800 Total ($000)$578.1 $578.1 $578.1 $578.1 $578.1 $578.1 $578.1 $578.1 $578.1 $578.1 $578.1 $578.1 $578.1 $578.1 $578.1 Page 377 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON INVENTORY OF CAPITAL ASSETS SERVICES RELATED TO A HIGHWAY: OPERATIONS 2025 Raods Fleet & Related Equipment UNIT COST 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 ($/vehicle) Roads and Public Works Billy Goat 1 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - $3,400 Bobcat 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $130,000 Cars and Vans 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 $62,700 Compact Excavator - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $166,400 Gator 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 $20,800 Heavy Duty Trucks - Flushers 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $498,800 Heavy Duty Trucks - Single Axle 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 14 15 16 17 $312,300 Heavy Duty Trucks - Sweepers 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 $470,300 Heavy Duty Trucks - Tandems 13 13 13 13 13 13 14 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 $358,100 Light Duty Trucks 18 19 22 24 24 25 26 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 $104,000 Loaders/Graders/Chipper - Brushcutter 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $56,700 Loaders/Graders/Chippers - Backhoes 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 $259,100 Loaders/Graders/Chippers - Chippers 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 $124,400 Loaders/Graders/Chippers - Excavator 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 $851,700 Loaders/Graders/Chippers - Graders 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 4 4 $645,500 Loaders/Graders/Chippers - Loaders 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 $417,800 Medium Duty Trucks 7 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 $125,400 Sidewalk Tractors - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 5 $184,900 Steamer - - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 $31,200 Tractors 3 3 4 4 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $297,900 Trailers 6 6 7 6 6 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 6 7 8 $50,000 Total (#)77 79 86 88 88 86 88 91 91 91 91 93 95 98 106 $18,498.4 $18,727.8 $19,634.2 $20,262.5 $20,262.5 $19,454.0 $19,916.1 $20,736.3 $20,736.3 $20,736.3 $20,736.3 $21,694.1 $22,056.4 $23,064.2 $23,948.3 Parks & Rec Vehicles and Equipment Unit Cost 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 ($/vehicle) Backhoe 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 259,100$ Ballpark Groomer - - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 58,400$ Beach Groomer - - - - - - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 52,000$ Cars and Vans 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 62,700$ Heavy Duty Trucks - Compactors 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 250,800$ Heavy Duty Trucks - Forestry Truck 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 309,300$ Ice Resurfacers 2 2 2 3 4 4 4 4 5 6 6 6 6 6 6 156,000$ Light Duty Trucks 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 104,000$ Medium Duty Trucks 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 125,400$ Mobile Stage - - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 184,900$ Top Dresser 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 34,600$ Tractor/Mowers/ATV's - ATV's 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 19,300$ Tractor/Mowers/ATV's - Loaders 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 172,300$ Tractor/Mowers/ATV's - Mowers 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 8 8 18,200$ Tractor/Mowers/ATV's - Tractors 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 5 8 10 10 71,900$ Trailers 12 13 15 14 14 10 10 10 10 11 11 11 11 11 11 20,800$ Total (#)34 35 38 38 39 37 38 38 39 43 43 45 48 51 51 $2,346.2 $2,367.0 $2,659.4 $2,794.6 $2,950.6 $3,110.7 $3,214.7 $3,214.7 $3,370.7 $3,618.8 $3,618.8 $3,786.6 $3,954.3 $4,148.6 $4,148.6 Page 378 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON INVENTORY OF CAPITAL ASSETS SERVICES RELATED TO A HIGHWAY: ROADS & RELATED Lane Kilometres of Major Roadway UNIT COST Road Type 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 ($/km) Rural Collector 10.31 10.31 10.31 10.31 10.31 12.49 14.68 14.68 14.68 14.68 16.86 16.86 16.86 16.86 16.86 $1,642,000 Rural Arterial 149.97 162.91 164.77 174.59 181.79 184.43 202.18 203.50 209.74 220.04 227.74 240.35 249.39 249.39 249.39 $1,806,000 Urban & Semi-Urban Collector 60.96 64.34 66.23 69.34 76.86 81.18 84.35 85.87 86.92 97.02 98.44 99.52 102.29 102.29 102.29 $1,858,000 Urban & Semi-Urban Arterial 76.21 79.85 86.85 94.41 98.38 101.44 106.59 107.47 107.47 111.17 115.97 120.95 122.43 122.43 122.43 $2,134,000 Total (#)297 317 328 349 367 380 408 412 419 443 459 478 491 491 491 Total ($000)$563,670.7 $601,088.1 $622,896.9 $662,543.2 $697,990.6 $720,894.6 $773,427.0 $780,513.0 $793,733.3 $838,996.7 $869,364.1 $904,771.7 $929,402.9 $929,402.9 $929,402.9 Bridges & Culverts UNIT COST Description 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 ($/unit) Road Bridges 90 90 90 90 91 91 91 91 92 95 95 95 95 95 95 $1,320,000 Structural Culverts 45 57 49 50 50 50 50 52 54 54 54 56 57 57 57 $1,050,000 Total (#)135 147 139 140 141 141 141 143 146 149 149 151 152 152 152 Total ($000)$166,050.0 $178,650.0 $170,250.0 $171,300.0 $172,620.0 $172,620.0 $172,620.0 $174,720.0 $178,140.0 $182,100.0 $182,100.0 $184,200.0 $185,250.0 $185,250.0 $185,250.0 Streetlights, Signals & Crossings UNIT COST Description 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 ($/unit) Streetlight Luminaires 1,869 1,870 1,884 1,894 1,904 1,918 1,918 1,920 2,647 8,062 8,887 8,893 8,927 9,229 9,323 $600 Streetlight Poles 8,592 8,592 8,603 8,603 8,603 8,603 8,603 8,613 8,613 8,615 8,757 8,763 8,769 8,800 8,875 $6,500 Signalized Intersections 15 15 15 17 17 18 18 20 20 20 21 22 23 23 23 $290,000 Pedestrian Crossings - - - - - - - - - 1 4 5 5 5 8 $64,000 Roundabouts 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 4 5 6 6 6 6 6 $581,597 Total (#)10,478 10,479 10,504 10,516 10,526 10,541 10,542 10,556 11,284 16,703 17,675 17,689 17,730 18,063 18,235 Total ($000)$62,482.6 $62,483.2 $62,563.1 $63,149.1 $63,155.1 $63,453.5 $64,035.1 $64,681.3 $65,699.1 $69,606.7 $72,088.3 $72,484.9 $72,834.3 $73,217.0 $73,952.9 Page 379 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON CALCULATION OF SERVICE LEVELS SERVICES RELATED TO A HIGHWAY: ROADS & RELATED & OPERATIONS 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Historic Population 83,157 84,548 85,990 87,457 88,949 90,466 92,010 93,821 95,667 97,550 99,470 101,427 103,359 105,328 107,334 Historic Employment 22,072 22,328 23,196 24,098 25,035 26,008 27,019 27,576 28,145 28,726 29,319 29,923 30,751 31,602 32,477 105,229 106,876 109,186 111,555 113,984 116,474 119,029 121,397 123,812 126,276 128,789 131,350 134,110 136,930 139,811 INVENTORY SUMMARY ($000) Roads and Related $792,203.3 $842,221.3 $855,710.0 $896,992.3 $933,765.7 $956,968.1 $1,010,082.1 $1,019,914.3 $1,037,572.4 $1,090,703.4 $1,123,552.3 $1,161,456.6 $1,187,487.2 $1,187,869.9 $1,188,605.8 Opertations $67,648.9 $67,963.1 $69,161.9 $69,925.4 $70,361.4 $69,713.0 $70,279.1 $71,099.3 $71,255.3 $71,503.4 $71,503.4 $72,629.0 $73,159.0 $74,361.1 $75,245.2 Total ($000)$859,852.2 $910,184.4 $924,871.9 $966,917.7 $1,004,127.1 $1,026,681.1 $1,080,361.2 $1,091,013.6 $1,108,827.7 $1,162,206.8 $1,195,055.7 $1,234,085.5 $1,260,646.2 $1,262,231.0 $1,263,851.0 Average SERVICE LEVEL ($/capita)Service Level Roads and Related $7,528.37 $7,880.37 $7,837.18 $8,040.81 $8,192.08 $8,216.15 $8,486.02 $8,401.48 $8,380.23 $8,637.46 $8,723.98 $8,842.46 $8,854.58 $8,675.02 $8,501.52 $8,346.51 Opertations $642.87 $635.91 $633.43 $626.82 $617.29 $598.53 $590.44 $585.68 $575.51 $566.25 $555.20 $552.94 $545.52 $543.06 $538.19 $587.18 Total ($/population & employment)$8,171.25 $8,516.28 $8,470.61 $8,667.63 $8,809.37 $8,814.68 $9,076.45 $8,987.15 $8,955.74 $9,203.70 $9,279.18 $9,395.40 $9,400.09 $9,218.07 $9,039.71 $8,933.69 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON CALCULATION OF MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE SERVICES RELATED TO A HIGHWAY: ROADS & RELATED & OPERATIONS 15-Year Funding Envelope Calculation 15 Year Average Service Level (2010-2024)$8,933.69 Household & Employment Growth 2025-2034 38,395 Maximum Allowable Funding Envelope $343,008,939 APPENDIX C TABLE 1 - PAGE 6 Page 380 Operations Infrastructure Total Grants, Subsidies Net Municipal Total Available DC 2025 Post Gross Cost Other Recoveries Cost %$DC Eligible Reserves 2034 2034 Buildings, Land & Equipment 1 2 3 Land Acquisition for South Courtice Satellite Facility 2035 -2035 6,480,000$ -$ 6,480,000$ 0%-$ 6,480,000$ -$ -$ 6,480,000$ Municipal Fleet and Equipment - Roads 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Municipal Fleet and Equipment - Parks 22 23 Sportsfield Tow Behind Mower Attachment for Tractors 2025 -2025 30,150$ -$ 30,150$ 0%-$ 30,150$ 30,150$ -$ -$ 24 25 26 2025 -2025 25,125$ -$ 25,125$ 0%-$ 25,125$ 25,125$ -$ -$ 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 SERVICES RELATED TO A HIGHWAY: ROADS & RELATED & OPERATIONS Timing Benefit to Existing APPENDIX C TABLE 2 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 2025 DEVELOPMENT CHARGES BACKGROUND STUDY Page 381 Operations Infrastructure Total Grants, Subsidies Net Municipal Total Available DC 2025 Post Gross Cost Other Recoveries Cost %$DC Eligible Reserves 2034 2034 44 1 Ton Crew Cab Utility Truck 2029 -2029 126,000$ -$ 126,000$ 0%-$ 126,000$ -$ 126,000$ -$ 45 46 47 48 49 50 Municipal Fleet and Equipment - Community Services 51 52 53 54 55 56 Municipal Fleet and Equipment - Legislative Services 57 Municipal Fleet and Equipment - Planning & Infrastructure 58 59 Studies 60 Sub-total Operations 109,200,835$ -$ 109,200,835$ 31,382$ 109,169,453$ 13,951,178$ 81,238,275$ 13,980,000$ Page 382 Roads Infrastructure Length Total Grants, Subsidies Net Municipal Total Available DC 2025 Post From To (metres)Gross Cost Other Recoveries Cost %$DC Eligible Reserves 2034 2034 1 2 3 4 5 Culvert Works 6 7 8 9 10 Baseline Rd. Culvert - Extension at Robinson Creek (w. of R.R. 34)2033 -2033 311,400$ -$ 311,400$ 0%-$ 311,400$ -$ 311,400$ -$ 11 Intersection Works 12 George Reynolds Dr. 13 Green Rd. 14 King Ave./Baldwin St./North Street 2026 -2026 415,800$ -$ 415,800$ 50%207,900$ 207,900$ 207,900$ -$ -$ 15 King St. 16 Longworth Ave./Green Rd. (Intersection)2027 -2027 415,800$ -$ 415,800$ 50%207,900$ 207,900$ -$ 207,900$ -$ 17 Bennett Rd. 18 Trulls Rd. 19 Baseline Rd. 20 Baseline Rd. 21 Baseline Rd. 22 Clarington Blvd. 23 Mearns Ave./Concession St. (Signals)2031 -2031 415,800$ -$ 415,800$ 50%207,900$ 207,900$ -$ 207,900$ -$ 24 Baseline Rd. 25 Conc. St. E/Lambs Rd. Intersection 2032 -2032 415,800$ -$ 415,800$ 50%207,900$ 207,900$ -$ 207,900$ -$ 26 King St./Scugog St. (Intersection)2035 -2035 711,400$ -$ 711,400$ 50%355,700$ 355,700$ -$ -$ 355,700$ 27 Toronto St./Mill St. Intersection 2035 -2035 210,900$ -$ 210,900$ 50%105,450$ 105,450$ -$ -$ 105,450$ 28 Trulls Rd. 29 Baseline Rd./Holt Rd. (Signals)2036 -2036 415,800$ -$ 415,800$ 50%207,900$ 207,900$ -$ -$ 207,900$ 30 Baseline Rd. 31 Holt Rd./Bloor St. (Signals)2036 -2036 415,800$ -$ 415,800$ 50%207,900$ 207,900$ -$ -$ 207,900$ 32 Longworth Ave. 33 ICS - Hancock Rd 34 ICS - Hancock Rd 35 ICS - Lambs Rd APPENDIX C TABLE 2 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 2025 DEVELOPMENT CHARGES BACKGROUND STUDY SERVICES RELATED TO A HIGHWAY: ROADS & RELATED & OPERATIONS Timing Benefit to Existing Page 383 Roads Infrastructure Length Total Grants, Subsidies Net Municipal Total Available DC 2025 Post From To (metres)Gross Cost Other Recoveries Cost %$DC Eligible Reserves 2034 2034 36 Bennett Rd. Railroad Crossing 37 Arthur St. Railroad Crossing 38 Prestonvale Rd. Railroad Crossing 39 Provision for Future Railroad Crossing Improvements 2025 -2034 507,500$ -$ 507,500$ 0%-$ 507,500$ -$ 507,500$ -$ Road Works - New Urban Collectors 40 George Reynolds Dr. 41 West Side Drive Extension Baseline Road 50m South of Baseline Road 50.0 2025 -2025 286,100$ -$ 286,100$ 0%-$ 286,100$ 286,100$ -$ -$ 42 SBRC Road 43 Bennett Rd. Road Works - Collector Road Oversizing 44 Longworth Ave. (Road Oversizing) 45 Longworth Ave. (Road Oversizing) 47 Clarington Blvd Collector Road Oversizing Road Works - Rural to Urban Collector 48 Conc. Rd. 3 49 Conc. Rd. 3 50 Green Rd. 51 Baseline Rd. 52 Lambs Rd. 53 Trulls Rd. 54 East Shore Dr. 55 Concession St. E. 56 Haines St. 57 Nash Rd. (Future Clarington Blvd.) 58 Lambs Rd. 59 Prestonvale Rd. 60 Conc. Rd. 3 61 Baseline Rd. 62 Green Rd.670.0 2032 -2032 4,309,500$ -$ 4,309,500$ 8%335,000$ 3,974,500$ -$ 3,974,500$ -$ 63 Lambs Rd. 64 Baseline Rd. 65 Baseline Rd. 66 Concession St. E. 67 Bloor St. Upgrade 68 Trulls Rd. 69 Bennett Rd. 70 Conc. Rd. 3 71 Conc. Rd. 3 72 Bennett Rd. 73 Hancock Rd. 74 Hancock Rd. 75 Arthur St. 76 Arthur St.Conc. Rd. 3 515.0 2026 -2032 1,784,400$ -$ 1,784,400$ 14%257,500$ 1,526,900$ -$ 1,526,900$ -$ Page 384 Roads Infrastructure Length Total Grants, Subsidies Net Municipal Total Available DC 2025 Post From To (metres)Gross Cost Other Recoveries Cost %$DC Eligible Reserves 2034 2034 77 Lambs Rd. 78 Maple Grove Rd. 79 Middle Rd. 80 Conc. Rd. 3 81 Old Scugog Rd. 82 Pebblestone Rd. 83 Pebblestone Rd. 84 Temperance St Upgrade 86 Concession Road 4 Upgrade (Future Clarington Ops Depot/Fire Station 400.0 2026 -2028 3,000,000$ -$ 3,000,000$ 7%200,000$ 2,800,000$ -$ 2,800,000$ -$ Road Works - Semi Urban to Urban Collector 87 Nash Rd. 88 Baseline Rd. 89 Trulls Rd. 90 Stevens Rd. 91 Queen Street Servicing Upgrade Road Works - New 4-lane Urban Collector 92 Prince William Blvd. 93 Longworth Ave. 94 Longworth Ave. 95 Energy Drive 96 Green Rd. Widening 97 Lambs Rd. 98 Baseline Rd. Road Works - New 4-lane Urban Arterial 99 Townline Road Extension 100 Hancock Rd. 101 Meadowglade Road Road Works - Reconstruct Rural Road to Regional Standard 102 Holt Rd. 103 Holt Rd. 104 Holt Rd. 105 Holt Rd. Sidewalks 106 Bloor St. Sidewalk 107 Manvers Road (East Side Sidewalk) 108 Prestonvale Rd. Sidewalk 109 Prestonvale Rd. Sidewalk 110 Reg. Rd. 57 Sidewalk East Side 111 Regional Rd. 17 Sidewalk East Side 112 Regional Rd. 17 Sidewalk West Side 113 Tooley Rd. Sidewalk 114 Highway 2 Sidewalk 115 Highway 2 Sidewalk 116 Trulls Rd. Sidewalk 117 West Scugog Lane Sidewalk 118 Bloor St. (North Side Sidewalk) Page 385 Roads Infrastructure Length Total Grants, Subsidies Net Municipal Total Available DC 2025 Post From To (metres)Gross Cost Other Recoveries Cost %$DC Eligible Reserves 2034 2034 119 Bloor St. (South Side Sidewalk)Trulls Rd.Courtice Rd.2025 -2025 1,351,000$ -$ 1,351,000$ 25%337,750$ 1,013,250$ -$ 1,013,250$ -$ 120 Bloor St. Sidewalk 121 Bloor St. (South Side Sidewalk) 122 Reg. Rd. 57 Sidewalk East Side 123 Scugog St. Sidewalk 124 Highway 2 Sidewalk 125 Regional Rd. 17 Sidewalk West Side 126 Highway 2 Sidewalk on South Side 127 Liberty St. Sidewalk 128 Liberty St. Sidewalk 129 Regional Highway 2 2025 -2025 57,900$ -$ 57,900$ 50%28,950$ 28,950$ 28,950$ -$ -$ 130 Regional Highway 2 131 West Townline Rd. Sidewalk 132 Reg. Rd. 57 Sidewalk East Side 133 Hancock Rd. 134 Regional Rd. 34 Sidewalk Active Transportation Infrastructure 135 Regional Rd. 17 MUP East Side 136 Bloor St./Reg. Rd. 22 MUP 137 Reg. Rd. 57 (West Side MUP) 138 Reg. Rd. 57 (West Side MUP) 139 Reg. Rd. 57 (West Side MUP) 140 Reg. Rd. 57 (West Side MUP) 141 Bloor St./Reg. Rd. 22 MUP 142 Nash Rd. 143 Nash Rd. (Cycling Lanes) 144 Baseline Rd. 145 Baseline Rd. 146 Baseline Rd. 147 Baseline Rd. (South Side Cycling Facility) 148 Baseline Rd. 149 Baseline Rd. 150 Courtice Rd. MUP 151 Concession Rd 3 MUP 152 Bloor St./Reg. Rd. 22 MUP 153 Courtice Rd. MUP 154 Courtice Road (East Side Sidewalk) 155 Coutice Rd. (Regional Road 34) 156 Bloor St. (South Side MUP) 157 Liberty St. Sidewalk & MUP Page 386 Roads Infrastructure Length Total Grants, Subsidies Net Municipal Total Available DC 2025 Post From To (metres)Gross Cost Other Recoveries Cost %$DC Eligible Reserves 2034 2034 158 Reg. Rd. 57 Streetlighting 159 Highway 2 160 Hancock Rd. 161 Highway 2 Streetlighting 162 Highway 2 Streetlighting 163 Reg. Rd. 57 Streetlighting 164 Courtice Rd. Streetlighting 165 Coutice Rd. (Regional Road 34) 166 Regional Rd. 17 Streetlighting 167 Courtice Road Streetlighting 168 Bloor St. (Streetlighting) 169 Bloor St./Reg. Rd. 22 Streetlighting 170 Regional Rd. 17 Streetlighting Page 387 Roads Infrastructure Length Total Grants, Subsidies Net Municipal Total Available DC 2025 Post From To (metres)Gross Cost Other Recoveries Cost %$DC Eligible Reserves 2034 2034 171 Newcastle Streetscape Phase 1 172 Frank St. (Streetscape) 173 Newcastle Streetscape Phase 2 174 St. George St. Tree Planting (Streetscape) 175 Newcastle Streetscape Phase 3 176 King St. Corridor Improv. (Streetscape) 177 King Street Corridor Improv. (Streetscape) 178 Highway 2 Streetscape 179 Highway 2 Streetscape 180 Highway 2 Streetscape 181 Highway 2 Streetscape 182 Highway 2 Streetscape 183 Highway 2 Streetscape 184 Highway 2 Streetscape Studies 185 Hospital Transportation Review 2025 -2034 59,900$ -$ 59,900$ 25%14,975$ 44,925$ -$ 44,925$ -$ 186 Transportation Master Plan Update 2025 -2029 225,300$ -$ 225,300$ 25%56,325$ 168,975$ -$ 168,975$ -$ 187 Transportation Master Plan Update 2030 -2034 112,700$ -$ 112,700$ 25%28,175$ 84,525$ -$ 84,525$ -$ 188 Bowmanville Waterfront Redevelopment Transportation Network Needs and Feasibility Study 2025 -2034 90,300$ -$ 90,300$ 25%22,575$ 67,725$ -$ 67,725$ -$ 189 Active Transportation and Trails MP 2029 -2034 90,300$ -$ 90,300$ 10%9,030$ 81,270$ -$ 81,270$ -$ 190 Development Traffic Monitoring Studies for D.C. Project Implementation 2025 -2034 180,700$ -$ 180,700$ 0%-$ 180,700$ -$ 180,700$ -$ 191 Active Transportation 401 and Rail Crossing Feasibility Study 2025 -2028 100,000$ -$ 100,000$ 10%10,000$ 90,000$ -$ 90,000$ -$ Non-Site Specific Improvements 192 Erosion Protection Works 2025 -2034 4,026,500$ -$ 4,026,500$ 33%1,328,769$ 2,697,731$ -$ 2,697,731$ -$ Sub-total Roads and Related 36637.0 389,407,378$ 30,300$ 389,377,078$ 45,291,178$ 344,085,900$ 23,298,187$ 260,748,806$ 60,038,906$ TOTAL SERVICES RELATED TO A HIGHWAY 498,608,213$ 30,300$ 498,577,913$ 45,322,560$ 453,255,353$ 37,249,365$ 341,987,081$ 74,018,906$ Residential Share of 2025 - 2034 DC Eligible Costs 78%$266,407,936 2025 - 2034 Net Funding Envelope $343,008,939 35,923 $7,416 Reserve Fund Balance Balance as at December 31, 2024 $37,249,365 Industrial Development Charges Calculation Non-Residential Share of 2025 - 2034 DC Eligible Costs 8%$28,008,742 314,400 $89.09 Non-Residential Share of 2025 - 2034 DC Eligible Costs 14%$47,570,403 233,303 $203.90 Page 388 Page 1 of 2 The Municipality of Clarington December 5, 2025 Financial Planning / Deputy Treasurer File 9365 40 Temperance Street Bowmanville, ON L1C 3A6 Attn: Musawer Muhtaj, Senior Financial Analyst, Financial Planning RE: Comment Letter: 2025 Development Charge By-law 113 Down Road, “Courtice Waterfront” Municipality of Clarington, Ontario Weston Consulting is the authorized planning consultant for 1725596 Ontario Limited, the registered owner of the lands municipally known as 113 Down Road and legally described as PT LT 31 CON BROKEN FRONT DARLINGTON PT 1 in the Municipality of Clarington (“MOC”), herein referred to as the “Subject Lands”. Weston Consulting, on behalf of the owner, has reviewed the 2025 Development Charges Background Study prepared by Hemson Consulting dated March 25, 2025, and the proposed Development Charge By-law being presented to the Planning and Development Committee on December 8, 2025. While we are generally supportive of the overall intent and direction of the proposed Development Charge By-law, we provide the following comments for your consideration: 1 - Parks and Indoor Recreation The owner is in support of the allocation of Development Charges to the various park development projects across the Municipality of Clarington, as well as supporting the goals of the Parks, Recreation and Culture Master Plan (“PRCMP”). The municipal wide park, and Waterfront Trail connection as envisioned in the Courtice Waterfront and Energy Park Secondary Plan (“CWEP”) and being proposed as part of the overall development vision for the Subject Lands, is a significant development project for the municipality and is critical in achieving the goals of the PRCMP. We note that Sections 41 and 42 of the proposed Development Charge By-law permit the MOC to enter into credits-for-work agreements and front-ending agreements in accordance with Section 38 and Section 44 in the Development Charges Act, 1997 respectively. As such, we request assurance that for when park and Waterfront Trail development, programming, and construction is undertaken on the subject lands, that these be eligible for Development Charge credits if privately funded prior. 2 - Services Related to a Highway (Roads and Related Operations) As part of the ultimate development objectives and vision of the CWEP for the Subject Lands, multiple public roads and associated infrastructure is being proposed, including a crossing over Tooley Creek to access the proposed development and municipal wide park on the Subject lands. Where the development of this infrastructure is privately funded and/or initiated, we are also requesting assurance that this infrastructure or portions thereof would be eligible for Development Charge recovery. Page 389 Page 2 of 2 The proposed road network is critical to the implementation of the CWEP area and will provide a direct benefit to all public users of the park area. As such, the owner is requesting that appropriate road infrastructure within the CWEP area be funded completely or in part by Development Charge allocations. 3 – Pumping Stations and Infrastructure Furthermore, components of critical servicing infrastructure such as pumping and lift stations, sanitary sewer and watermain connections and force main lines are required for development including the municipal wide park. Where the development of this infrastructure is privately funded and/or initiated, we would request assurance that this infrastructure would also be eligible for Development Charge recovery where appropriate as they are critical to both Municipal and Private development objectives. Conclusion We thank Municipality of Clarington Staff for reviewing our comments and look forward to future discussions as the proposed Development Charge By-law is anticipated to be approved at Council on December 15, 2025. Please contact the undersigned at rguetter@westonconsulting.com or Nicholas Klymciw at nklymciw@westonconsulting.com if you have any further questions or comments regarding this Letter. Yours truly, Weston Consulting Per: Ryan Guetter, BES, MCIP, RPP President C. 1725596 Ontario Limited Paul DeMelo, Kagan Shastri DeMelo Winer Park LLP Nicholas Klymciw, Weston Consulting Page 390 Applicant/Owner: Rachelle Larocque from The Biglieri Group c/o. 1829963 Ontario Incorporated Application Details: Proposal to commercially fill a former mineral aggregate pit in Clarington, previously licensed under the Aggregate Resources Act. The objective is to bring the pit to a level consistent with the surrounding natural terrain, thereby making the land suitable for future uses. The project is expected to import approximately 60,000 cubic metres of clean fill annually, for a total of approximately 300,000 cubic metres. Statutory Public Meeting COPA2025-0015 & ZBA2025-0020 Location: 3061 Regional Road 20 Meeting Date: December 8, 2025 Page 391 Statutory Public Meeting File #: COPA2025-0015 and ZBA2025-0020 December 8, 2025 3061 Regional Road 20 Page 392 130 Meters to South Pelham Road Subject Site Subject Site Page 393 Site History Aggregate extraction operation was initiated in the 1970’s. The operations continued to the early 2010’s when it was purchased by Fourteen Estates, the current owners of the property. Shortly after Fourteen Estates purchasing the property it was determined that the removal of aggregate was no longer financially viable, and the owners looked to raise the grade of the pit. Filling could not occur while the aggregate pit was still licensed as Clarington could not issue a Site Alteration Permit until the aggregate license was surrendered. The aggregate license was surrendered in 2014 by the MNR. Page 394 Site History Continued An Official Plan Amendment and Temporary Zoning By-law Amendment were approved in 2014 to allow the property to be used in conjunction with the Boots and Hearts Festival. As the festival has now moved, this interim use was no longer needed. Fourteen Estates again looked to bring fill onto the property to raise the grade of the former pit lands Page 395 Proposed Application Application for Official Plan Amendment To allow for a commercial fill operation on the property to raise the grade of the former aggregate pit area. Application for Zoning By-law Amendment: To amend the Aggregate Extraction Zone to allow for a commercial fill operation on the property to raise the grade of the former aggregate pit to be consistent with the surrounding property. Proposal: to permit a commercial fill operation on the property to allow approximately 300,000 cubic metres of fill (approximately 60,000 cubic metres per year) to raise the grade of the former pit area on the property. Page 396 Supporting Materials & Additional Information To support the applications for OPA & ZBA the following reports and studies were submitted: Planning Rationale Report Site Grading and Topographic Plan Preliminary Soil Management Plan Landscape Plan Scoped Environmental Impact Study A Site Alteration Permit will be required by Clarington, and will require the following information: Final Site Grading Plan Soil Management Plan in accordance with O.Reg 406/19 Traffic Brief Page 397 Questions? Page 398 Public Meeting and Recommendation Report If this information is required in an alternate accessible format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131. Report To: Planning and Development Committee Date of Meeting: December 8, 2025 Report Number: PDS-068-25 Authored By: Jacob Circo, Senior Planner Submitted By: Darryl Lyons, Deputy CAO, Planning and Infrastructure Services Reviewed By: Mary-Anne Dempster, CAO File Number: COPA2025-0015 and ZBA2025-0020 Resolution#: Report Subject: Applications for Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment to permit a commercial fill operation at 3061 Regional Road 20 in Clarington. Purpose of Report: The purpose of this report is to provide information to the public and recommend approval if there are no major concerns raised from the public. Recommendations: 1. That Report PDS-068-25 and any related communication items, be received; 2. That Staff receive and consider comments from the public, review agencies, and Council with respect to the Official Plan Amendment and Zoning by-law Amendment applications to permit a commercial fill operation; and, 3. That the Clarington Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment applications submitted by Biglieri Group Ltd. be approved as proposed in Attachments 1 and 2 to report PDS-068-25. Page 399 Municipality of Clarington Page 2 Report PDS-068-25 Report Overview 1. Application Details Owner: 1829963 Ontario Inc. Agent: Rachelle Larcoque c/o. The Biglieri Group Proposal: The proposal is seeking approval to commercially fill a former mineral aggregate pit in Clarington, previously licensed under the Aggregate Resources Act. Clarington Official Plan Amendment: To permit a commercial fill operation as an additional use within the Rural designation, to be located within the former aggregate extraction area, in addition to the existing site-specific permissions outlined in Section 23.19.6.vii of the Clarington Official Plan. Zoning By-law Amendment: To rezone the subject lands from “Aggregate Extraction (AE) Zone” to a special exception zone within the “Aggregate Extraction (AE) Zone” to permit a commercial fill operation. Area: 8.08 hectares (19.97 acres) Location: 3061 Regional Road 20, Darlington (see Figure 1) Roll Number: 1817-010-110-19100 Page 400 Municipality of Clarington Page 3 Report PDS-068-25 Figure 1: Location of Subject Lands 2. Background 2.1 On August 18, 2025, Planning Staff received a Clarington Official Plan Amendment application and Zoning By-Law Amendment application which seeks to commercially fill a former mineral aggregate pit, previously licensed under the Aggregate Resources Act. The applications were deemed complete on September 25, 2025. 2.2 Over time, aggregate pit licenses are surrendered, revoked or modified. Once a licence has been surrendered or revoked, Official Plan policy 15.3.1 states that the aggregate extraction designation overlay in the Official Plan is deleted and the Zoning By-law must be amended to delete the aggregate pit and associated uses. Appropriate zoning categories must then be implemented. Page 401 Municipality of Clarington Page 4 Report PDS-068-25 2.3 The former aggregate pit ceased operation in 2014. A rehabilitation plan for the site was subsequently approved by the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry. Implementation of the rehabilitation plan, undertaken in c onjunction with the surrender of the aggregate licence, involved portions of the site using soils excavated during past operations. However, given the volume of material previously removed, additional clean fill is needed to further raise the grade of the former extraction area. Under the current proposal, all imported material will meet required O.Reg.406/19 standards for clean fill, ensuring compatibility with and support for future appropriate land uses on the property. 2.4 On May 25, 2014, Municipal Council approved Clarington Official Plan Amendment No. 98 (approved through By-law 2014-054) to permit the subject property to be used for unserviced camping, ticket booths, and ancillary uses (such as portable washrooms and day parking), accessory to adjacent lands permitting music festivals. Concurrently, Council approved a Temporary Use By-law (approved through By-law 2014-056) under Section 39 of the Planning Act, which permitted agricultural uses, camping, ticket booths, and ancillary uses associated with a musical festival permitted on the Motorsport Park for a maximum of three years. While the temporary use permissions have since expired, the site-specific land use permissions allowing for accessory uses, as detailed in Section 23.19.6.vii) of the Clarington Official Plan, remain in effect. 2.5 At a meeting on May 13, 2024, the Planning and Development Committee considered a staff recommendation report (Staff Report PDS-020-24) presented as part of a municipal initiated exercise for eight inactive former ARA pits, which the subject lands were part of. However, Council did not move forward with the proposed amendment given the uncertainty of the future uses of the lands expressed by the subject landowners. 2.6 The following plans and studies were submitted in support of the applications: Planning Justification Report Draft Clarington Official Plan Amendment Draft Zoning By-law Amendment Topographic Drawing Survey Site Screening Questionnaire Fill Management Plan Scoped Environmental Impact Study Landscape Plan Region of Durham Support Letter Cover Letter and Pit Rehabilitation Plan 3. Land Characteristics and Surrounding Uses 3.1 The subject property is located at 3061 Regional Road 20 in Clarke, having frontage on Regional Road 20 (see Figure 1) and the site is currently a vacant lot and was previously used as an ARA-licensed pit, with the license having been surrendered in 2014. Page 402 Municipality of Clarington Page 5 Report PDS-068-25 3.2 The surrounding uses are as follows: North: Other aggregate pit operations within the City of Kawartha Lakes . East: Woodlot, agricultural lands and the Canadian Tire Motorsport Park. South: Agricultural lands. West: Woodlot and agricultural lands. 4. Provincial Policy Provincial Planning Statement (PPS) 2024 4.1 The lands are considered Rural Area as defined by the PPS (2024). Recreational, tourism and other economic opportunities are promoted in Rural Areas. Development that is compatible with the rural landscape and sustained by rural service levels should be promoted. Development shall be appropriate to the available infrastructure. 4.2 The PPS 2024 provides guidance on the sustainable use and management of resources, including agricultural lands, natural heritage, and mineral aggregates. It promotes the long-term protection of mineral aggregate resources while emphasizing the need for both progressive and final rehabilitation of extraction sites. This approach helps ensure land use compatibility, mitigate potential negative impacts, and encourages comprehensive rehabilitation planning, particularly in areas with concentrated extraction operations. 4.3 Policy 4.1.8 of the PPS (2024) speaks to development and site alteration not being permitted on adjacent lands to natural heritage features, unless an evaluation shows no negative impact on the natural features or their ecological functions of the adjacent lands. A Scoped Environmental Impact Study was completed by Oakridge Environmental Limited and assess potential impacts of the proposed fill on natural heritage features and areas with species at risk. The only identified feature is a significant woodlan d in the southern portion of the site, southwest of the extraction area. The study concludes that filling can proceed with no impact to the woodland, provided recommended mitigation and protection measures are followed. 4.4 The subject site is a former gravel pit with a surrendered license. A rehabilitation plan was implemented to eliminate steep slopes, but the site grades still do not match adjacent lands, as this was not required under the plan. The proposed commercial fill operation aligns with PPS policies for aggregate mineral resources by supporting progressive rehabilitation of an under-utilized site and enabling future land uses. Raising the former extraction area to natural grades will improve the site’s usability, ensure compatibility with surrounding agricultural activities, and minimize environmental impacts. The use of clean fill meeting O.Reg.406/19 standards further supports long-term resource conservation and suitability for intended future uses. 4.5 The proposal is consistent with the PPS (2024). Page 403 Municipality of Clarington Page 6 Report PDS-068-25 Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (ORMCP 2017) 4.6 The ORMCP designates the subject lands as “Countryside Area”. This designation is intended to support agricultural and rural uses that promote the continuation of farming and rural land use activities, preserve the rural character of settlements, and enable compatible forms of economic development, among other objectives. 4.7 Permitted uses within the “Countryside Area” include small-scale commercial, industrial and institutional uses as described in Section 40 of the ORMCP. Small-scale commercial, industrial and institutional uses, among other criteria, do not require large -scale modification of terrain, vegetation or both. 4.8 Development proposals shall incorporate best practices for the management of excess soil generated and fill received during any development or site alteration to ensure that : a) Excess soil is reused on-site or locally to the maximum extent possible; b) Where feasible, excess soil reuse planning is undertaken concurrently with development planning and design; and c) The quality of fill received and the placement of fill at the site will not cause an adverse effect with regard to the current or proposed use of the property, the natural environment or cultural heritage resources and is compatible with adjacent land uses. 4.9 The site is located within a Category 2 (Moderately Complex) Landform Conservation Area in the ORMCP. An application for development or site alteration with respect to land in a Category 2 landform conservation area shall identify plann ing, design and construction practices that will keep disturbance to landform character to a minimum . 4.10 The rehabilitation plan, implemented with the surrender of the aggregate license, regraded the site using soils from the original pit operations. Additional clean fill meeting O.Reg.406/19 standards is required to raise the former extraction area to support future land uses. All proposed commercial filling activities will be confined to the former pit area, outside the Natural Environment and Natural Linkage Areas. 4.11 The proposed commercial filling operation conforms to the policies of the ORMCP (2017). 5. Official Plans Durham Region Official Plan (Envision Durham) 5.1 The Durham Region Official Plan (Envision Durham) designates the subject lands as “Oak Ridges Moraine Area” in Envision Durham, in accordance with Map “2b” of Envision Durham (2024). Map 4 of Envision Durham identifies the property as being within a “Sand and Gravel Resource Area”. Page 404 Municipality of Clarington Page 7 Report PDS-068-25 5.2 Countryside Areas within the Oak Ridges Moraine are areas of existing rural land use intended to protect prime agricultural areas, provide for the continuation of agricultural and other rural land uses and maintain the character of Rural Settlements. A portion of the subject site was previously used as an ARA licensed pit, until the license was surrendered to the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry in 2014. 5.3 Map “2d” of Envision Durham shows that the site is located within a Significant Groundwater Recharge Area, which is an area of land that is responsible for replenishing groundwater systems that directly support sensitive areas like cold water permanent and/or intermittent streams and wetlands. It is the policy of Envision Durham to improve and restore hydrological features and their functions and minimizes direct alteration to groundwater flows. The site is being restored to the previous grades and through the Site Alteration Permit the applicant will need to demonstrate that the water quality will not be negatively impacted. 5.4 Map “2g” of the ROP identifies the subject site as being located within a highly vulnerable aquifer and an area of high aquifer vulnerability. It is the policy Envision Durham to protect a highly vulnerable aquifer and areas of high aquifer vulnerability when considering new development or site alteration by implementing the relevant requirements of the applicable source water protection plan. 5.5 Section 6.7 of Envision Durham speaks to aggregate site rehabilitation. The submitted proposed fill management plan aligns with Section 6.7 of Envis ion Durham by supporting the rehabilitation of former extraction sites. Filling the former licensed ARA pit restores the land for productive uses while ensuring compatibility with surrounding rural and non - agricultural landscapes. The proposal also meets provincial standards for rehabilitation and promotes sustainable management of aggregate resources by repurposing the site and minimizing the social and financial impacts of past aggregate extraction. The Scoped Environmental Impact Study prepared by Oakridge Environmental Limited concludes that the proposed commercial filling of the former ARA-licensed pit will not negatively impact nearby natural features. 5.6 The proposal conforms to Envision Durham (2024). Clarington Official Plan (COP) 5.7 The Clarington Official Plan (COP) designates the northern portion of the subject site as “Rural” and the southern portion “Environmental Protection Area” and “Natural Linkage Area. A commercial fill operation is not permitted in the areas designated as “Environmental Protection Area” or “Natural Linkage Area”. The area of the proposed commercial fill operation is the former Aggregate Resources Act licensed aggregate pit which is designated “Rural”, and will not be taking place on the portions of the property designated “Environmental Protection Area” or “Natural Linkage Area” within the COP. Page 405 Municipality of Clarington Page 8 Report PDS-068-25 5.8 The Scoped Environmental Impact Study that was prepared by Oakridge Environmental Limited identifies Significant Woodland habitats on the subject property, and Table 3 -1 of the COP requires a minimum vegetation protection zones setback of 30 metres from a significant woodland and wetlands. The proposed commercial fill operation conforms to the natural heritage system policies as the operation will be situated greater than 30 metres from the natural features, as detailed in the "Constraints" map within the S coped Environmental Impact Study (see Figure 2). Figure 2: Constraints Map, included in the Scoped Environmental Impact Study prepared by Oakridge Environmental Limited. 5.9 Policy 3.6.5 of the COP states that commercial fill operations are only permitted by amendment to this Plan and will require a permit under the Municipality’s Site Alteration By-law and/or from the appropriate Conservation Authority where applicable. As such, an amendment was submitted to facilitate the application. Page 406 Municipality of Clarington Page 9 Report PDS-068-25 5.10 The subject lands within the former extraction area were previously assigned the “Aggregate Extraction Area Overlay”, however, this overlay is considered to have been removed in accordance with Policy 15.3.1, when the licensed under the Aggregate Resources Act was surrendered in 2014. Section 15.1.2 of the COP speaks to the rehabilitation and closure of licensed aggregate extraction operations. Although a rehabilitation plan for the extraction site has been completed, the final grades were not fully achieved. In accordance with the Soil Management Plan, t he proposed commercial fill operation would restore the site to its pre-extraction elevations, ensuring the lands are suitable for future agricultural and non-agricultural uses appropriate for the subject lands. 5.11 An Official Plan Amendment is included in Attachment 1 of this report. 6. Zoning By-law 2005-109 6.1 The subject property is zoned “Aggregate Extraction (AE) Zone”, “Environmental Protection” and “Natural Linkage” within Zoning By-law 2005-109. Permitted uses include a pit, conservation, and agricultural uses. A “pit” is defined as an area of land where unconsolidated mineral aggregate such as gravel, stone and sand is extracted pursuant to a license or a permit issued under the Aggregate Resources Act. A pit may include as an accessory use a mineral aggregate crusher, mineral aggregate processing, and/or mineral aggregate recycling. 6.2 The submitted Zoning By-law Amendment is required to permit the proposed commercial fill operation and would require a special exception zone within the “Aggregate Extraction (AE) Zone” (see Attachment 2). The former Aggregate Resources Act licensed pit is currently zoned “Aggregate Extraction (AE) Zone” within Zoning By-law 2005-109 and will be rezoned “Aggregate Extraction Exception (AE-2) Zone” to permit a “Large Fill Operation” as defined by Clarington Site Alteration By-law 2024-017. Clarington Site Alteration By-law 2024-017 defines a “large fill operation” as “an operation that involves placing, dumping, or removing more than 500 cubic metres of fill”. 7. Summary of Background Studies Planning Rationale Report prepared by The Biglieri Group Ltd., August 2025 7.1 The Planning Rationale Report prepared and submitted in support of the proposal concludes that the applications represent good planning and are in the public interest. Region of Durham’s Site Screening Questionnaire Form completed by Toronto Inspection Ltd., June 27, 2025 7.2 The Region’s Site Screening Questionnaire Form was reviewed as part of the Clarington Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment applications by the Municipality of Clarington Planning Staff. In accordance with the Region’s Soil and Groundwater Assessment Protocol, the proponent submitted the Region’s Site Screening Questionnaire (SSQ), signed by a Qualified Person under the meaning of the Environmental Protection Act. As such, Municipality of Clarington is satisfied that all matters related to potential site contamination have been addressed. Page 407 Municipality of Clarington Page 10 Report PDS-068-25 Updated Scoped Natural Heritage Evaluation prepared by Oakridge Environmental Ltd., August 2025 7.3 The Scoped Natural Heritage Evaluation is an update to the 2014 Natural Heritage Evaluation Report, prepared by Oakridge Environmental Ltd. The updated report was completed to identify and assess impacts to Key Natural Heritage Features, including Special Concern Species at Risk and Significant Woodland proximal to the proposed commercial fill operation. The Scoped Natural Heritage Evaluation Report concludes that the proposed commercial filling activities can proceed without impacting the natural features, provided that mitigation and recommendation measures recommended in the report are adhered to. The proposed commercial fill operation will occur well beyond the minimum 30 minimum vegetation protection zone setback (see Figure 2). Fill Management Plan prepared by Nick Carchidi Excavating Limited, May 2, 2025 7.4 The Fill Management Plan has been submitted to support the applications and the eventual Site Alteration Permit Application. The report confirms that all imported soil will satisfy the applicable quality standards set out in the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks (MOECP) "Rules for Soil Management and Excess Soil Quality Standards," based on chemical analysis. The receiving site will use its own stripped topsoil material for re-vegetation, minimizing reliance on imported fill types. A confirmed source site and its chemical analysis will be provided once secured by the proponent. The operation is expected to import approximately 60,000 cubic metres of fill per year over a five-year period, totaling an estimated 300,000 cubic metres of fill. 7.5 The Fill Management Plan will be certified by a qualified professional and submitted with the Site Alteration Permit. An annual topographic survey will be required along with the certified report. The report will provide confirmation that the monitoring meets all the requirements of the permit and Provincial standards. Information regarding the truck volume generated by the fill operation will also be required. This volume is projected to generate approximately 60,000 truckloads per year. The proponent's anticipated schedule for truck deliveries is limited to the hours of 7:00 AM to 5:30 PM. To prevent mud and dust tracking onto Regional Road 20, a mud mat will be installed at the site entrance, and the owner will remain responsible for all road cleaning activities associated with the operation. The site will also be identified as a large fill permit and tipping fees will apply. 8. Public Notice and Submissions 8.1 Public Notice was mailed to 8 landowners within 300 metres of the subject lands on Wednesday, November 19, 2025. One public meeting sign was installed on the subject lands, along Regional Road 20. Details of the proposed application were also posted on the Municipality’s website (www.clarington.net/3061RegRd20), and in the Clarington Connected e-newsletter. 8.2 As of writing of this report, staff have not received comments from the public. Page 408 Municipality of Clarington Page 11 Report PDS-068-25 9. Departmental and Agency Comments 9.1 Various agencies and internal departments were circulated for comments on the applications. Attachment 3 to this report provides a list of circulated parties and a summary of the comments. 10. Discussion 10.1 The traffic concerns associated with the proposed commercial filling operation are similar to those created by the former licensed aggregate pit. The current road network, including the turning lanes, were specifically designed and upgraded to accommodate the high volumes generated by the nearby Kovac's Pit and the former Keystone Pit (former aggregate pit on the subject property). Since the Keystone pit license has been surrendered and the Kovac's Pit is currently hauling below its full capacity, the road infrastructure is already well-equipped and underutilized relative to its design standards. Furthermore, the addition of the much lower-volume fill operation is not expected to necessitate further traffic studies at this stage, justifying the deferral of the traffic impact brief, required by the Regional Works Department, as a submission requirement for the Clarington Site Alteration Permit 10.2 The owner has committed to strict operational controls to further mitigate potential traffic impacts, including limiting truck deliveries to regular business hours (7:00 AM to 5:30 PM). The estimated 60,000 annual truckloads of commercial fill are distributed over the five-year operational period, minimizing peak-hour congestion. Moreover, measures such as the installation of a mud mat at the entrance and the owner's responsib ility for continuous road cleaning of Regional Road 20 will ensure that the subject site's operations maintain appropriate safety and cleanliness standards. These measures will minimize disruption to through traffic and nearby properties and will uphold cleanliness requirements to the satisfaction of the Regional Municipality of Durham 10.3 Once the commercial fill operation has been completed in accordance with the Clarington Site Alteration Permit, a future zoning by-law amendment would be required to change the zoning to allow other uses. A Record of Site Condition would also be required as part of the rezoning application process for any future uses. 11. Financial Considerations 11.1 The capital infrastructure required for this development will be negligible given tha t the subject is not serviced, there are no new sidewalks being proposed and the road is already constructed. The Municipality will be responsible for the major repair, rehabilitation, and replacement in the future for any capital assets. 12. Strategic Plan 12.1 The proposed development has been reviewed against the three pillars of the Clarington Strategic Plan 2024-27. Staff gave special attention to the priorities of growing resilient, sustainable, and supporting a strong local economy. The proposal aligns with Clarington’s Strategic Plan. Page 409 Municipality of Clarington Page 12 Report PDS-068-25 13. Climate Change 13.1 The proposed commercial fill operation and site regrading aligns with the Municipality’s climate goals by re-establishing the original, natural land contours. The project restores natural drainage patterns and improves vegetation. Furthermore, the responsible use of excess soil from other development sites prevents this material from being transported over long distances, thereby reducing the overall carbon footprint associated with material management and disposal. This approach transforms an underutilized site into one with the opportunity to support future uses for agricultural and permitted non - agricultural uses. 14. Concurrence 14.1 Not Applicable. 15. Conclusion 15.1 Should there be no significant concerns from the public, Staff recommend that the applications submitted by the Biglieri Group Ltd. to amend the Clarington Official Plan and Zoning By-law 2005-109 to permit a commercial fill operation be approved and the Clarington Official Plan Amendment as shown on Attachment 1 and Zoning By-law as shown on Attachment 2 be passed. In the event that significant concerns are raised, it is recommended that this matter be referred back to staff . Staff Contact: Jacob Circo, Senior Planner, (905) 623-3379 x 2425 or jcirco@clarington.net. Attachments: Attachment 1 – Clarington Official Plan Amendment Attachment 2 – Zoning By-law Amendment Attachment 3 – Department and Agency Comments Interested Parties: List of Interested Parties available from Department. Page 410 Municpality of Clarington Amendment Number 145 To The Municipality of Clarington Official Plan Purpose: The purpose of this Amendment is to permit a commercial fill operation in addition to the existing permissions provided to the Rural designation and the existing site-specific land use permissions provided in Section 23.19.6.vii of the Official Plan, to the property with Assessment Roll Number 1817- 010-110-19100 (3061 Regional Road 20). The proposed commercial fill activity involves the importation of approximately 300,000m³ of clean fill over a five-year period to regrade and level a former aggregate extraction site, with the objective of restoring the land for agricultural use that are generally on the northern portion of the subject property. Location: The Official Plan Amendment affects the subject lands with Assessment Roll Number 1817- 010-110-19100 (3061 Regional Road 20). The area more specifically described within 300 metres from Regional Road 20 and to a maximum area of 12 hectares. Basis: This Official Plan Amendment is based on an application submitted by 1829963 Ontario Incorporated to permit a commercial fill operation on the subject lands. The proposal involves importing approximately 300,000 m³ of clean fill over five years to regrade and level a former aggregate pit, with the intent of restoring the land for agricultural use. The application is supported by technical studies and plans, including a Scoped Natural Heritage Evaluation, Soil Management Plan, Pit Rehabilitation Plan, Landscaping Plan, and Topographic Plan . The Amendment will permit a commercial fill operation in addition to permissions provided by the Rural designation and the existing site-specific land use permissions provided in Section 23.19.6.vii of the Official Plan. The Amendment aligns with the intent of the Rural designation to support long-term agricultural viability. Actual Amendment: The Clarington Official Plan is hereby amended as follows: (*Note: New text is shown with an underline and deleted text is shown with a strikethrough) 1. Existing Section 23.19.6.vii of the Clarington Official Plan is amended as follows: Page 411 Municpality of Clarington “In addition to the permissions provided by the Rural designation, the property with Assessment Roll Number 1817- 010-110-19100 (3061 Regional Road 20) shall be primarily used for: a. low intensity recreation, b. recreation uses which are higher in intensity and require modification of the land surface accompanied by the introduction of buildings and structures, and c. recreation uses of relatively low intensity requiring minimal modifications of the land surface, the minimal removal of trees, and relatively few if any buildings or structure; and d. a commercial fill operation within the area more specifically described as within 300 metres from Regional Road 20 and to a maximum area of 12 hectares. In addition to the permitted uses described above, the permitted uses also include unserviced camping, ticket booths and ancillary uses such as portable washrooms and day parking, as accessory to nearby lands that permit music festivals, subject to the following: Permanent buildings and/or structures related to the temporary use are prohibited; Alteration to grades outside of the licensed area or fill area is prohibited; Page 412 Municpality of Clarington Natural heritage features will be appropriately buffered; Site Plan approval will be obtained to address such matters as site layout; access; temporary fencing, signage and lighting; and monitoring of measures to mitigate environmental impacts.” Implementation: The provisions set forth in the Municipality of Clarington Official Plan regarding the implementation of the Plan, shall apply in regard to this amendment Interpretation: The provisions set forth in the Municipality of Clarington Official Plan, regarding the interpretation of the Plan, shall apply in regard to this Amendment, save and except that a commercial soil operation shall be permitted on this property. File number: COPA-2025-0015 Page 413 Attachment 2 to Municipality of Clarington Report PDS-068-25 Page | 1 Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington By-law Number 2025-______ being a By-law to amend By-law 2005-109, the Comprehensive Zoning By-law for the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington Whereas the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington deems it advisable to amend By-law 2005-109, as amended, of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington for ZBA2025-0020; Now Therefore Be It Resolved That, the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington enacts as follows: 1. Section 3. “Definitions” is hereby amended by adding thereto, a new definition for a Commercial Fill Operation as follows: “Commercial Fill Operation Means the placing or dumping of fill involving remuneration paid, or any other form of consideration provided, to the owner or occupier of the land, whether or not the remuneration or consideration provided to the owner is the sole reason for the placing or dumping of the fill” 2. Section 14.4 “AE Extraction Zone” is hereby amended by adding thereto, the following new Special Exception Zone 14.4.2. as follows: “14.4.2 AE-2 Zone a. Permitted Uses: i) Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 14.2, lands zoned AE-2 shall only be used for a Commercial Fill Operation. b. Regulations: i) Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 14.3, the following additional yard requirements shall apply: a) No placing or dumping of fill shall be within 30 metres of an Environmental Protection Zone.” Page 414 3. Schedule ‘E12’ to By-law 2005-109, as amended, is hereby further amended by changing the zone from “Aggregate Extraction (AE) Zone” to “Aggregate Extraction Exception (AE-2) Zone”, as illustrated on the attached Schedule ‘A’ hereto. 4. Schedule ‘A’ attached hereto shall form a part of this By-law. 5. This By-law shall come into effect on the date of passing hereof, subject to the provisions of Section 34 of the Planning Act. Passed in Open Council this _____ day of December, 2025. __________________________ Adrian Foster, Mayor __________________________ June Gallagher, Municipal Clerk Page 415 Page | 3 Page 416 Attachment 3 to Report PDS-068-25 Attachment 3 – Agency and Department Comments The following agencies and internal departments were circulated for comments on the applications. Below is a chart showing the list of circulated parties and whether or not we have received comments to date. Department/Agency Comments Received Summary of Comment Durham Region Community Growth and Ec. Dev. Department ☒ The Region Community Growth and Economic Development Department has no objection to the Clarington Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment subject to submitting a traffic impact brief/memo at the time of submitting a site alteration with the Municipality of Clarington, for the purpose of filling the former mineral aggregate pit. Durham Region Works Department ☒ Regional Works Department has no objection to the Clarington Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment subject to the applicant/owner submitting a traffic impact brief/memo at the time of submitting a site alteration with the Municipality of Clarington, for the purpose of filling the former mineral aggregate pit. Enbridge ☒ Enbridge has no objection to the rezoning. Ganaraska Region Conservation Authority (GRCA) ☒ GRCA has no objection to the Clarington Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment. There appears to be no wetlands/regulated natural hazards on the property. Additionally, the property is not within GRCA’s regulated area so a permit from the GRCA is not required. GRCA would just recommend maintaining existing drainage, use of appropriate erosion sediment control and stabilize the site when complete using native, non-invasive species. Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks ☒ The Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks (MECP) have no objection to the Clarington Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment. MECP has reviewed the documents provided and compliance with Ontario Regulation 406/19 – On-site and Excess Soil Management is required. The provided soil management plan seems to address most of the requirements, and the site will be governed under an instrument outside of the regulation (Municipal Site Alteration Permit). MECP did not see the mention of the requirement to file a notice to the Excess Soil Page 417 Registry for reuse sites that will be receiving more than 10,000 cubic metres of excess soil in the documents provided. Soil storage on-site must also comply with the ministry’s Soil Rules document. Further ministry involvement may be required if activities on site change, or when the site is further developed, depending on land- use/on-site activities. Clarington Fire & Emergency Services Division ☒ Clarington Fire & Emergency Services Division has no objection to Clarington Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment. There are no fire safety concerns. Clarington Engineering Development Division ☒ Clarington Development Engineering Division has no objection to the Clarington Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment. A soil management plan is required to obtain a site alteration permit. Revisions to the grading plan and erosion sediment control plan are required as part of the submission of the site alteration permit along with a traffic impact brief, as required by the Region Works Department. Clarington Economic Development Division ☒ No concerns or objections. Page 418 Applicant/Owner: Mark Jacobs from The Biglieri Group c/o. Cedardale Realty Holdings Incorporated Application Details: •Clarington Official Plan Amendment to amend the Southeast Courtice Secondary Plan in the Clarington Official Plan by designating lands previously designated as Parkette to Low Density Residential. •Zoning By-law Amendment to support the development. •Draft Plan of subdivision to construct 370 units which includes a low-density area and medium-density residential area. Statutory Public Meeting COPA2025-0016, ZBA2025-0021 & S-C-2025-0006 Location: Southeast Corner of Bloor Street at Trulls Road Meeting Date: December 8, 2025 Page 419 Bloor Street & Trulls Road Subdivision Bloor Street & Trulls Road, Courtice Statutory Public Meeting December 8th, 2025 Municipal File #: S -C -2025-0006, COPA-2025-0016 & ZBA2025-0021 Page 420 CONTEXT Page 421 SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENT CONTEXT Page 422 SUBJECT SITE ➢Area: 8.1 hectares ➢Frontage: 200 metres on Bloor Street and 404 metres on Trulls Road ➢Vacant Agricultural Property ➢Woodland located at Southeast corner of site Tr u l l s R d Page 423 SURROUNDING AREA 3 2 4 4 3 2 1 1 North – Rural Residential East - Hope Fellowship Church South – Rural Residential West - Courtice Glen subdivision Page 424 PLANNING POLICY CONTEXT ➢Durham Regional Official Plan (2024) ▪Community Areas ▪Bloor Street designated Regional Corridor ➢Municipality of Clarington Official Plan (2018) ▪Urban Residential ▪Regional Corridor ▪Environmental Protection Area ➢Southeast Courtice Secondary Plan ▪Approved by Durham Region in March 2022 ➢Municipality of Clarington Zoning By-Law 84-63 ▪A - Agricultural Zone Municipality of Clarington Official Plan Map A2 – Land Use Region of Durham Official Plan Map 1 – Regional Structure Subject Site Subject Site Page 425 SOUTHEAST COURTICE SECONDARY PLAN Designations: ➢Medium Density Regional Corridor ➢Low Density Residential ➢Parkette ➢Environmental Protection Area Page 426 SOUTHEAST COURTICE SECONDARY PLAN ➢Medium Density Regional Corridor ▪Permitted Uses: ▪Mix of housing types and tenures in mid-rise building forms. ▪Retail and service uses shall be provided at strategic locations ▪Permitted Dwelling Types: ▪Apartment buildings; ▪Townhouses; ▪Stacked townhouses; ▪Dwelling units within a mixed-use building; ▪Additional Dwelling Units; and ▪Other dwelling types that provide housing at the same or higher densities as those above. ▪Height and Density ▪A minimum height of 3 storeys and a maximum of 6 storeys. ▪Overall average density of 85 units per net hectare. No less than 60 units per net hectare. ➢Low Density Residential ▪Permitted Uses: ▪Mix of housing types and tenures in low-rise building forms. ▪Permitted Dwelling Types: ▪Detached Dwellings; ▪Semi-detached Dwellings; ▪Townhouses; and, ▪Additional Dwelling Units. ▪Height and Density ▪Shall not exceed 3 storeys in height. ▪A Minimum density of 13 units per net hectare Page 427 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ➢Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment & Draft Plan of Subdivision Applications ▪370 Total Units ▪Medium Density Regional Corridor Block ▪204 Apartment Units ▪25 Link Townhouses ▪Low Density ▪64 Street Townhouses (6.1 -m frontages) ▪77 Single Detached (9.15 - and 11 -m frontages) ▪Natural Heritage System (0.34 Hectares) ▪15-metre Woodland MVPZ ▪Public Roads Proposed: ▪Street ‘A’,’B’,’C’,’E’,’F’ - Local Roads ▪Street ‘D’ - East-West Collector Road ▪Road Widenings ▪Bloor Street – 10 metres ▪Trulls Road – 5 metres Page 428 MEDIUM-DENSITY REGIONAL CORRIDOR ➢Medium Density Mixed Use Block (1.43 hectares) ▪6 Storey Mixed Use Building ▪87 Residential Dwelling Units ▪Commercial GFA of 868 square metres ▪6 Storey Residential Apartment Building ▪117 Residential dwelling units ▪3 Storey Link Townhouses ▪25 Units located at south side of block ▪Each unit has 2 parking spaces ▪Parking ▪25 spaces at grade (22 Commercial, 3 Visitor) ▪215 paces below grade (One Storey underground parking structure) ▪Outdoor Amenity Area ▪Privately Owned Public Space ▪6.5 metre Private Road ▪East and West access from Street A ▪Emergency Access to/from Bloor Street Page 429 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS ➢Official Plan Amendment ➢Relocation of Parkette on Southeast Courtice Secondary Plan Schedule A to adjacent lands ➢Zoning By-law Amendment ➢Rezoning of Site with Site-Specific Provisions: ➢Urban Residential Type Two Exception Zone (R2-XX) ➢Urban Residential Type Three Exception Zone (R3-XX) ➢Residential Mixed Use Exception Zone (MU2-XX) ➢Environmental Protection Zone (EP) ➢Draft Plan of Subdivision applications ▪370 Total Units ▪Facilitates creation of Medium Density Regional Corridor block , f reehold lots, environmental protection block, public roads, and road w idenings Page 430 ADDITIONAL SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED ➢Draft Plan of Subdivision (Biglieri) ➢Draft Amendments (Biglieri) ➢Planning Rationale Report (Biglieri) ➢Urban Design Brief (Biglieri) ➢Sustainability Brief (Biglieri) ➢Block Plan (Biglieri) ➢On-Street Parking Plan (Biglieri) ➢Functional Servicing & Stormwater Management Report (Crozier) ➢Site Servicing, Grading, Drainage and Erosion and Sediment Control Plans (Crozier) ➢Geotechnical Investigation (Cambium) ➢Phase 1 and 2 Environmental Site Assessments (Cambium) ➢Hydrogeological Investigation Report (Cambium) ➢Noise Feasibility Study (HGC Engineering) ➢Transportation Impact Study (GHD) ➢Environmental Impact Study (SLR) ➢Arborist Report & Tree Protection Plan (SLR) ➢Stage 1 and 2 Archaeological Assessments (TMHC) ➢Topographic Survey (JD Barnes) Page 431 QUESTIONS? Page 432 Public Meeting Report If this information is required in an alternate accessible format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131. Report To: Planning and Development Committee Date of Meeting: December 8, 2025 Report Number: PDS-072-25 Authored By: Jacob Circo, Senior Planner Submitted By: Darryl Lyons, Deputy CAO, Planning and Infrastructure Services Reviewed By: Mary-Anne Dempster, CAO File Number: COPA2025-0016, ZBA2025-0021, and S-C-2025-0006 Resolution#: Report Subject: Proposal for 370 Residential Units and Ground Floor Retail Space at the Southeast Corner of Bloor Street and Trulls Road in Courtice Purpose of Report: The purpose of this report is to provide information to the public and Council. It does not constitute, imply or request any degree of approval. Recommendations: 1. That Report PDS-072-25 and any related communication items, be received for information only; 2. That Staff receive and consider comments from the public, review agencies, and Council with respect to the Clarington Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment, and Draft Plan of Subdivision applications submitted by The Biglieri Group Ltd. on behalf of Cedardale Realty Holdings Inc. and continue processing the applications including the preparation of a subsequent recommendation report; and 3. That all interested parties listed in Report PDS-072-25 and any delegations be advised of Council’s decision. Page 433 Municipality of Clarington Page 2 Report PDS-072-25 Report Overview The Municipality is seeking the public’s input on applications for an Official Plan Amendment Low-Density Residential Area Medium-Density Regional Corridor Area 1. Application Details Owner : Aaron Brown c/o Cedardale Realty Holdings Inc. Applicant: Jacob Wright c/o The Biglieri Group Ltd. Proposal: Clarington Official Plan Amendment To amend the Southeast Courtice Secondary Plan in the Clarington Official Plan by designating lands previously designated as Parkette to Low Density Residential. Zoning By-law Amendment: To rezone the subject lands from “Agricultural (A)” to “Urban Residential Exception (R2-XX) Zone”, “Urban Residential Exception (R3-XX) Zone”, Residential Mixed Use Exception (MU2-XX)”, and “Environmental Protection (EP)”, to support the development of a Low-Density Residential Area and Medium-Density Regional Corridor Area. Draft Plan of Subdivision: A Draft Plan of Subdivision to facilitate two development areas: a Low-density Residential Area, providing single-detached and street townhouse residential dwellings, and a Medium Density Regional Corridor Residential Area, providing street and link townhouse units, a 6-storey residential apartment building and a 6-storey mixed-use apartment building with commercial uses at grade. Both areas provide a total of 370 residential dwelling units. Page 434 Municipality of Clarington Page 3 Report PDS-072-25 Area: Approximately 8.08 hectares (19.97 acres) Location: Southeast Corner of Bloor Street and Trulls Road Roll Number: 1817-010-050-06900 2. Background 2.1 On September 25, 2025, The Biglieri Group Ltd. submitted a Clarington Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment, and Draft Plan of Subdivision for the subject lands at the Southeast Corner of Bloor Street and Trulls Roads (see Attachments 1, 2, and 3). The proposal shows a total of 370 residential units in a variety of built forms, including single detached dwellings, street townhouses, link townhouses, and two apartment buildings up to six-storeys with one building containing 868 square metres of ground floor retail space. The applications were deemed complete on October 29, 2025, and circulated to agencies and departments for comments. 2.2 A list of supporting materials is available on the project website http://www.clarington.net/PTLot30. 3. Land Characteristics and Surrounding Uses 3.1 The subject lands are situated on the southeast corner of Bloor Street at Trulls Road (see Figure 1), within the Courtice Urban Area. The subject lands are currently vacant agricultural lands. Page 435 Municipality of Clarington Page 4 Report PDS-072-25 Figure 1: Subject Lands Page 436 Municipality of Clarington Page 5 Report PDS-072-25 3.2 The surrounding uses are as follows: North Existing Single detached dwellings and agricultural lands. South Existing single detached dwellings, woodlands and agricultural lands. East Hope Fellowship Church, a telecommunications tower, woodlands, and vacant agricultural lands. West Tribute (King Street) Limited Subdivision associated with Registered Plan of Subdivision 40M-2784. 4. Provincial Policy Provincial Planning Statement (PPS 2024) 4.1 The Provincial Planning Statement (PPS 2024) encourages planning authorities to create healthy, livable, and safe communities by accommodating an appropriate range and mix of housing types and development patterns, while making efficient use of land and infrastructure. Opportunities for redevelopment and intensification are to be promoted where it can be accommodated. Municipal officials plan, secondary plans, and neighbourhood design plans support the PPS through land use designa tions and policies. 4.2 The PPS 2024 encourages a minimum density target of 50 residents and jobs per gross hectare in designated growth areas. The applicant has indicated a density of approximately 135.2 residents and jobs per gross hectare could be achieved from this development proposal. 4.3 Healthy and active communities should be promoted by planning public streets to be safe, meet the needs of pedestrians, foster social interaction, and facilitate active transportation and community connectivity. Compact and diverse developments promote active modes of transportation such as walking and cycling. 4.4 The diversity and connectivity of natural features in an area, and the long-term ecological function and biodiversity of natural heritage systems, should be maintained, restored or, where possible, improved, recognizing linkages between and among natural heritage features and areas, surface water features and ground water features. An Environmental Impact Study has been submitted and Arborist Report and Tree Protection Plan as part of this development proposal and will be summarized and discussed in a future recommendation report. 4.5 The PPS (2024) also states that planning for stormwater management shall promote stormwater management best practices, including stormwater attenuation and re -use, water conservation and efficiency, and low impact development. 4.6 The proposal is consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement. Page 437 Municipality of Clarington Page 6 Report PDS-072-25 5. Official Plans Durham Region Official Plan (Envision Durham) 5.1 The Durham Region Official Plan (Envision Durham) designates the subject lands “Regional Corridor” and “Community Areas”. 5.2 The subject lands are adjacent to Bloor Street, which is designated a “Regional “Corridor” in Envision Durham. “Regional Corridors” are be planned and developed as higher density mixed use areas, supporting higher order transit services and pedestrian orientated development. Each community within this community area designation shall be developed to incorporate the widest possible variety of housing types, sizes, and tenure to provide living accommodations that address various socioeconomic factors. 5.3 “Community Areas” are to be planned for a variety of housing types, sizes, and tenures, including singles and townhouse dwellings. These areas can also include population - serving uses and shall be developed in a compact form through higher densities and by intensifying and redeveloping existing areas. The ultimate objective of “Community Areas” is to develop complete communities that address various socio -economic factors, providing a range of housing, transportation, and lifestyle choices, and creating opportunities for residents to live, shop, work, and access services and amenities within their community. 5.4 Section 5.4.5.1 of Envision Durham requires development within the designated greenfield area shall be planned to achieve a minimum density target of not less than 53 people and jobs per hectare. A density of 135.2 people and jobs per hectare that is projected from this development proposal per the Planning Justification Report submitted by the agent, which exceeds the minimum density target. 5.5 Bloor Street is also identified as a High Frequency Transit Network as per Map ‘3a’ in Envision Durham. Map ‘3b’ of Envision Durham identifies Bloor Street as a Type A Arterial Road and Trulls Road is designated as a Type B Arterial Road on Map 3b in Envis ion Durham. 5.6 The application conforms with the Durham Region Official Plan. Clarington Official Plan 5.7 The Clarington Official Plan designates the subject lands “Urban Residential” and “Regional Corridor”. Environmental Protected lands are also identified at the southeast corner of the subject site. Permitted uses within the Urban Residential designation include townhouses and single detached dwellings. The minimum density target at the edge of the neighbourhood is 19 units per hectare and internally, 13 units per hectare. The height shall be between 1 to 3 storeys. Page 438 Municipality of Clarington Page 7 Report PDS-072-25 5.8 For Regional Corridors, permitted uses include apartments and mixed-use buildings. Minimum height is 3 storeys to a maximum of 12 storeys. Townhouses are not specifically listed within the Regional Corridor in the Clarington Official Plan, however low rise -built forms are permitted between 3-4 storeys and the direction for this area has been implemented through the approved Secondary Plan. The minimum net density is 85 units per hectare. Multi-unit residential development is subject to Section 9.4.5 of the Clarington Official Plan. 5.9 Multi-unit residential uses are also to be developed on the basis of the following site development criteria, as per policy 9.4.5: a) The site is suitable in terms of size and shape to accommodate the proposed density and building form; b) Compatibility with the surrounding neighbourhood in terms of scale, massing, height and siting, setbacks, shadowing, and the location of parking and amenity areas; c) Minimize impact of traffic on local streets; d) Multiple vehicular accesses from a public street shall generally be provided for each townhouse block and each apartment block; e) Each condominium corporation block shall have direct street frontage and direct vehicular access to a public street without reliance on easements through another condominium corporation block; f) In order to achieve a mixture of housing types, adjacent multi-unit residential unit types shall not replicate the same built form; g) Townhouses shall not be sited on opposite sides of the street in order to allow for sufficient on-street parking; h) Townhouses sited on blocks shall generally not exceed 50 units and apartment blocks shall not exceed 2 buildings; i) Street townhouses shall generally not comprise more than 6 attached units; and j) Where multiple mid-rise and high-rise residential developments are planned for a given area, a phasing plan shall be required to identify common amenity areas and shared pedestrian and/or vehicle access. 5.10 It is important to note that lands in Clarington’s Natural Heritage System and Minimum Vegetation Protection Zone will be required to be dedicated to the Municipality, free and clear of all encumbrances as part of the development application process and does not count towards parkland dedication. 5.11 Bloor Street is a “Type A Arterial Road” and Trulls Road is a “Type B Arterial Road” on Map J2 in the Clarington Official Plan Page 439 Municipality of Clarington Page 8 Report PDS-072-25 5.12 The south portion of the site shows Special Study Area 4 which delineates the Protected Transit Station Area on Land Use Map A2 of the Clarington Official Plan. Special Study Area 4 is now considered to be adjacent to the subject lands. Given the approval of the Southeast Courtice Secondary Plan, this area, which was previously shown as Light Industrial on the subject property, is now intended for residential uses. Policy 12.4.2 of the Secondary Plan states that, in the event of a conflict between the Official Plan and this Secondary Plan, the policies of the Secondary Plan shall prevail. Southeast Courtice Secondary Plan 5.13 The subject lands are within the Southeast Courtice Secondary Plan. Within the Secondary Plan, the subject lands are designated “Medium Density Regional Corridor” and “Low Density Residential” as shown on Schedule A of the Secondary Plan. There is also an Environmental Constraint overlay at the southeast corner of the site, as well as a parkette proposed on the subject lands, approximately 0.5 ha in size, and adjacent to the site, to the east, an “Elementary School” symbol. 5.14 The intersection of Bloor Street and Trulls Road is identified as a “Prominent Intersection”. Bloor Street and Trulls Road are to have dedicated bicycle lanes. An east- west collector road is also proposed approximately midway through the site. This collector road is to extend further east and connects to Courtice Road. A trail is also shown Schedule B of the Secondary Plan, which will be on the subject lands, which is adjacent to the environmental protection area. It runs north and south and connects into the proposed school site. A portion of this site appears to contain (partially) the west portion of the school site. 5.15 The “Medium Density Regional Corridor” designation permits a mix of housing types in mid-rise building forms. Retail and service uses shall be provided to achieve a variety of land uses within walking distance to the residential areas. Permitted uses include apartment buildings, townhouses, and dwelling units within mixed use buildings. Retail and service uses are only permitted on the ground floor of a mixed -use building and entrances oriented to the arterial road. These uses are encouraged at the ‘Prominent Intersection’ of Bloor Street and Trulls Road in the Secondary Plan. Within the “Medium Density Regional Corridor”, the building heights shall be between 3 to 6 storeys. 5.16 Development within the “Medium Density Regional Corridor” designation shall have an overall average density of 85 units per net hectare. In no case shall an individual development application have a density of less than 60 units per net hectare. The highest and most dense forms of development shall be located fronting Bloor Street. Development shall provide a transition, locating less dense and lower-scale buildings in locations adjacent to the “Low-Density Residential” designation within the urban residential area. Within the “Medium Density Regional Corridor” designation, buildings and townhouses less than 4 storeys in height are not permitted within 50 metres of the intersection of Bloor Street and Trulls Road. The link townhouses proposed within the Medium Density Regional Corridor indicate a height of three storeys and appear to be within 50 metres of the intersection. Further review and confirmation would be required and may result in an Official Plan Amendment to facilitate this proposal as currently shown. Page 440 Municipality of Clarington Page 9 Report PDS-072-25 5.17 Section 9.2.5 of the Secondary Plan indicates that development proposals and all public roads shall be designed to connect with the existing road network to create a rectilinear grid pattern of roads that defines development blocks and establishes a highly interconnected and permeable network that supports active transportation and maximizes accessibility and support for transit. 5.18 Detached and townhouse dwellings are permitted uses in the “Low Density Residential” designation. Detached units shall comprise a minimum of 80% of the total number of units in this designation. Also, building heights cannot exceed 3 stories and the minimum density is 13 units per net hectare. It is important to note that private streets and private lanes are not permitted within the “Low Density Urban Residential” designation. 5.19 Within the Secondary Plan a Parkette is within the area of the subject lands on Schedule A. The park is approximately 0.5 ha and the precise location of the parkette shall be determined at the time of development review and approval, based on the parkland provision requirements. Based on the proposal for 370 residential units, a parkette size of up to 0.617 hectares would be required. Parkettes are intended to be smaller scale parks, between 0.5 to 1.0 hectare in size, and are to provide a variety of amenities, but do not contain sports fields. Parkettes contribute to the variety of leisure and recreational amenities in the community and improve accessibility to park space by walking. Parks are encouraged to be bordered by public streets, natural heritage areas, or public facilities such as schools. Residential and commercial uses backing onto parks shall be minimized. 5.20 The current proposal does not show a parkette and proposes to designate the lands as Low Density Residential. An Official Plan Amendment has been prepared by the applicant and is included in Attachment 1 of this report. 6. Zoning By-law 6.1 The subject property is zoned “Agricultural (A)” within Zoning By-Law 84-63. A Zoning By- law Amendment is required to permit the proposed development which contains a range of building typologies, including single detached dwellings, townhouses, and two six storey apartment buildings, with ground floor commercial uses 6.2 The proposed zoning by-law amendment would allow for a total of 370 residential units, while also protecting environmentally sensitive lands (see Attachment 2). Four zones are proposed with a Holding (H) Symbol which would be lifted once all the conditions of the Draft Plan of Subdivision are fulfilled and the Site Plan Agreement is finalized for the medium-density block. The proposed zones include “Urban Residential Exception (R2- XX) Zone”, “Urban Residential Exception (R3-XX) Zone”, Residential Mixed-Use Exception (MU2-XX)”, and “Environmental Protection (EP)” (see Attachment 2). 6.3 Appropriate zone categories will be reviewed and addressed in a subsequent recommendation report. Page 441 Municipality of Clarington Page 10 Report PDS-072-25 7. Summary of Background Studies 7.1 The applicant has submitted the required supporting plans and studies which have been circulated to departments and agencies for review and comment. The list of studies and drawings are on the development application webpage at http://www.clarington.net/PTLot30 and are also available upon request. A summary of the submitted reports and studies will be provided in a future recommendation report. 8. Public Notice and Submission 8.1 Public Notice was sent to 26 households within 300 metres of the subject lands on November 19, 2025. Signage was also posted on the property, along Bloor Street and Trulls, advising of the complete application received by the Municipality and details of the public meeting. Details of the proposed application were also posted on the Municipality’s website, and in the Clarington Connected e-newsletter. 8.2 At the time of writing this report, Staff have not received any comments from the public. Any comments received, including from the Statutory Public Meeting, will be reviewed and addressed in the recommendation report. 9. Departmental and Agency Comments 9.1 The applications were circulated to internal departments and external agencies for review and comments. All received comments will be addressed in the subsequent recommendation report. 10. Discussion 10.1 The proposed development integrates a mix of built form typologies, natural heritage protection, and supporting infrastructure within the Southeast Courtice Secondary Plan Area. Development of the Medium Density Regional Corridor Block will be subject to a future Site Plan Approval application. Through this process, Municipal Staff, in collaboration with internal departments and external agencies, will undertake a comprehensive review to ensure the detailed design and functionality of the site meet all applicable standards, policies, and best practices. 10.2 The proposal does not show a parkette as identified on the Southeast Courtice Secondary Plan Land Use Map. Based on the proposed units, a park of about 0.617 hectares can be required and would meet the minimum size re quirements for a parkette. The Planning Justification Report indicates that the park is proposed to be relocated further east, off the subject site, and would therefore shift the school site further to the east so that it is adjacent to two collector roads. Staff will review the application determine if the proposed Official Plan Amendment is appropriate. As an alternative, cash-in-lieu of parkland dedication will be required. Page 442 Municipality of Clarington Page 11 Report PDS-072-25 10.3 The southeast portion of the site contains an environmental overlay. The defined limits of the Environmental Protection Area and the associated Minimum Vegetation Protection Zone (MVPZ) will be determined through the Environmental Impact Study and the applicable Clarington Official Plan policies. If any portion of the proposed development (lots, development block, etc.) is to be located within the MVPZ, Staff require the impacts of the net loss vs gain be assessed in the required Environmental Impact Study. 10.4 Municipal staff have requested a 23‑metre right‑of‑way for Street D, which is planned as a collector road extending east to connect with Courtice Road in accordance with the Secondary Plan. This connection is critical for providing an east‑west route through the neighbourhood as an alternative to Bloor Street and for enabling access to the adjacent school site and neighbourhood park planned further east of the subject lands. Since the site currently has only one proposed vehicular access until adjacent developments are completed, a temporary emergency vehicle access may be require d in the interim. 11. Financial Considerations 11.1 Not applicable, as this is an information report to introduce the proposal and gather public input at the Statutory Public Meeting. 12. Strategic Plan 12.1 The proposed development will be reviewed against the three pillars of the Clarington Strategic Plan 2024-27. Staff will give special attention to the priorities of growing resilient, sustainable, and a strong local economy. An analysis of the proposed development’s interaction with the specific priorities of the Strategic Plan will be included in the future recommendation report. 13. Climate Change 13.1 The application, including submitted reports are being reviewed by staff and circulated agencies. Analysis of the proposal, including the impacts on climate change will be discussed in a subsequent recommendation report. 14. Concurrence 14.1 Not applicable. 15. Conclusion 15.1 The purpose of this report is to provide background information on the proposal and obtain comments on the submitted application for an Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment, and Draft Plan of Subdivision for 370 residential units and 868 square metres of commercial floor space at the Statutory Public Meeting. Staff will continue to review and process the applications, including consideration of department, agency, and public feedback, and will prepare a subsequent recommendation report for Council’s consideration. Page 443 Municipality of Clarington Page 12 Report PDS-072-25 Staff Contact: Jacob Circo, Senior Planner, (905) 623-3379 ex. 2425 or jcirco@clarington.net. Attachments: Attachment 1 – Applicant Proposed Draft Clarington Official Plan Amendment Attachment 2 – Applicant Proposed Draft Zoning By-law Amendment Attachment 3 – Applicant Proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision Interested Parties: List of Interested Parties available from Department. Page 444 Official Plan Amendment Number XX to the Clarington Official Plan Purpose: To amend the Southeast Courtice Secondary Plan in the Clarington Official Plan by designating lands previously designated as Parkette to Low Density Residential. The amendment will permit the relocation of the Parkette to a different location in the Secondary Plan area and enable the development of 77 lots for single detached dwellings, 65 street townhouse dwellings, and one block for 229 medium density regional corridor units consisting of a mixed-use and residential apartment building and link townhouse units while protecting environmentally sensitive lands. Location: The Subject Site is located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Bloor Street and Trulls Road and has an area of 8.1 hectares. Basis: The Amendment is based upon the supporting background studies including an Environmental Impact Study and Functional Servicing Report. Actual Amendment: The Clarington Official Plan is hereby amended by amending Schedule A “Land Use” in the Southeast Courtice Secondary Plan as shown on Exhibit A to this Amendment. Implementation: The provisions set forth in the Municipality of Clarington Official Plan regarding the implementation of the Plan, shall apply in regard to this amendment. Interpretation: The provisions set forth in the Municipality of Clarington Official Plan regarding the interpretation of the Plan, shall apply in regard to this amendment. File Number: COPA 2025-xxxx Attachment 1 to Report PDS-072-25 Page 445 Exhibit “A” to Municipality of Clarington Official Plan Amendment No. ___, Schedule A, Southeast Courtice Secondary Plan Page 446 If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131 The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington By-law Number 202X-XXXX Being a By-law to amend By-law 84-63, the Comprehensive Zoning By-law for the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington. Whereas the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington deems it advisable to amend By-law 84-63, as amended, of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington for 84-63 ___________; Now therefore the Council of the Municipality of Clarington enacts as follows: 1.Section 13.4 “Special Exceptions – Urban Residential Type Two (R2) Zone” is amended by adding Special Exception Zone 13.4.XX as follows: “13.4.XX Urban Residential Exceptions (R2-XX) Zone Notwithstanding Sections 3.1 g.i), iv), 3.16 c.iii), e.vi), 13.2 a., b., c.i), ii), iii), iv), e., h., those lands zoned R2-XX on the Schedules to this By-law shall be subject to the following regulations: a.Lot Area (minimum)245 square metres b.Lot Frontage (minimum) i)Interior Lot 9.0 metres ii)Exterior Lot 12.0 metres c.Yard Requirements (minimum) i)Front Yard 6.0 metres to private garage or carport; 4.0 metres to dwelling; 2.0 metres to porch. ii)Exterior Side Yard 6.0 metres to private garage or carport; 4.0 metres to dwelling; 2.0 metres to porch. iii)Interior Side Yard 1.2 metres on one side, and 0.6 metres on the other side. iv)Rear Yard 7.0 metres Attachment 2 to Report PDS-072-25 Page 447 d. Lot Coverage (maximum) i) Dwelling 50 percent ii) Total of all Buildings and Structures 55 percent iii) Notwithstanding the above lot coverage provision, a covered and unenclosed porch/balcony having no habitable floor space above it, shall be permitted subject to the following: a) In the case of an interior lot, an unenclosed porch/balcony up to a maximum area of 12.0 square metres shall be permitted provided it is located in the front yard of the lot and shall not be calculated as lot coverage. b) In the case of an exterior lot, an unenclosed porch/balcony up to a maximum area of 20.0 square metres shall be permitted provided it is located in the front and/or exterior side yard of the lot and shall not be calculated as lot coverage. e. Landscape Open Space (minimum) i) Lot 30 percent ii) Front Yard 30 percent must be soft landscaping f. Building height (maximum) 12.0 metres g. Driveway Width (maximum) i) Lots under 10.0 metres 4.6 metres h. Garage Requirements i) All garage doors shall not be located any closer to the street line than the dwelling’s front wall or exterior side wall or covered porch projection. i. Height of floor deck of unenclosed 1.0 metre porch above finished grade (maximum) j. Special Yard Regulations i) Bay windows with foundations may project into any required yard to a distance of not more than 0.75 metres with the bay window having a maximum width of 2.4 metres, but in no instance shall the interior side yard be reduced below 0.6 metres. ii) Steps may project into the required front or exterior side yard, but in no instance shall the front of exterior side yard be reduced below 1.0 metres. iii) Visibility Triangle (minimum) 6.5 metres k. Parking Requirements (minimum) 2 parking spaces per dwelling unit Page 448 2. Section 14.6 “Special Exceptions – Urban Residential Type Three (R3) Zone” is amended by adding Special Exception Zone 14.6.XX as follows: “14.6.XX Urban Residential Exceptions (R3-XX) Zone Notwithstanding Sections 3.1. g.i), iv), 3.16.c.iii, 14.1, and 14.3 a., b.ii), c.ii), iii), iv), e., f., g., h., those lands zoned R3-XX on the Schedules to this By-law shall only be used for street townhouse dwellings, subject to the following regulations: a. Permitted Use Street Townhouses b. Lot Area (minimum) i) Interior Lot 150 square metres ii) Exterior Lot 230 Square metres c. Lot Frontage (minimum) i) Exterior Lot 9.0 metres d. Yard Requirements (minimum) i) Interior Side Yard 1.2 metres, nil where building has a common wall with any adjacent building on an adjacent lot in a R3 zone ii) Exterior Side Yard 3.0 metres iii) Rear Yard 6.0 metres e. Height of unenclosed porch above finished grade (maximum) 1.0 metre f. Lot Coverage i) Dwelling 55 percent ii) Total of all Buildings and Structures 60 percent iii) A covered and unenclosed porch/balcony having no habitable floor space above it, shall be permitted subject to the following: a) In the case of an interior lot, an unenclosed porch/balcony up to a maximum area of 10.0 square metres shall be permitted provided it is located in the front yard of the lot and shall not be calculated as lot coverage. b) In the case of an exterior lot, an unenclosed porch/balcony up to a maximum area of 15.0 square metres shall be permitted provided it is Page 449 located in the front and/or exterior side yard of the lot and shall not be calculated as lot coverage. g. Landscape Open Space (minimum) i) Lot 25 percent ii) Front Yard 30 percent must be soft landscaping h. Building height (maximum) 12.0 metres i. Special Yard Regulations i) Bay windows with foundations may project into any required yard to a distance of not more than 0.75 metres with the bay window having a maximum width of 2.4 metres, but in no instance shall the interior side yard be reduced below 0.6 metres. ii) Steps may project into the required front or exterior side yard, but in no instance shall the front of exterior side yard be reduced below 1.0 metres. j. Garage Requirements i) All garage doors shall not be located any closer to the street line than the dwelling’s front wall, exterior side wall, or covered porch. 3. Section 16A.7 “Site Specific Exceptions” is amended by adding Special Exception Zone 14.6.XX as follows: “16A.7.XX Residential Mixed Use Exceptions (MU2-XX) Zone a. For the purpose of Exception Section 16A.7.6, the term “Storey” means the portion of a building, other than an attic, basement or cellar, included between any floor level and the floor, ceiling or roof next above it but excludes portions that provide access to roof terraces. b. Permitted Uses in MU2-XX i. Apartment buildings ii. Mixed-Use Building iii. Linked Townhouse Dwellings iv. Stacked Townhouse Dwellings v. Back-to-back Townhouse Dwellings (as defined by Linked Townhouse Dwellings) vi. Long Term Care Facility vii. Retirement Home viii. Accessory buildings Page 450 ix. Retail Uses, Personal and Professional Service Uses, and Gathering Places and Community Uses as per Table 16A.2 including professional offices and medical office uses, shall only be permitted on the ground floor of a mixed- use building with an entrance and frontage onto an arterial road. c. Regulations for MU2-XX i. Number of storeys 3 storeys (Minimum) 4 storeys (Minimum) within 50 metres from the southeast corner of the intersection of Bloor Street and Trulls Road 6 storeys (Maximum) ii. Building Height 3 storeys (Minimum) 4 storeys (Minimum) within 50 metres from the southeast corner of the intersection of Bloor Street and Trulls Road 6 storeys (Maximum) iii. Buildings six storeys or taller shall setback all 0.0 metres floors above the fourth storey that face a public street iv. Setbacks (to public street): 3.0 metres (Minimum) 6.0 metres (Maximum) iv. Setbacks (to any other lot line): 3.0 metres (Minimum) v. Underground Parking Structure Setbacks (Minimum) 0.0 metres to any property line vi. Underground Parking Structure projecting 0.5 metres to any property line above grade but below finished ground floor elevation Setbacks (Minimum): vii. Minimum unit width for Linked Townhouse Dwellings 5.0 metres x. Special Yard Regulations - Notwithstanding any other provision of By-law 84-63 to the contrary, on lands zoned MU2-XX Zone the following shall apply: a) A maximum driveway width of 3 metres shall be permitted. b) The minimum setback to a sight triangle shall be 1.0 metre. In addition, unenclosed porches, steps, patios, ramps, landscape entrance features, attached or directly abutting the principal or main building, either above or below grade, may project into any required yard to a distance no closer than 0.5 metres to a sight triangle. c) Steps, landing and porches may project into the required front or exterior side yards, but in no instance shall the distance to the front lot line or exterior side lot line be below 1.0 metre. Page 451 4. Schedule ‘4’ to By-law 84-63, as amended, is hereby further amended by changing the zone designation from: “Agricultural (A)” to “Urban Residential Type Two Exception (R2-XX)” “Agricultural (A)” to “Urban Residential Type Three Exception (R3-XX)” “Agricultural (A)” to “Residential Mixed Use Exceptions (MU2-XX)” “Agricultural (A)” to “Environmental Protection (EP)” As illustrated on the attached Schedule ‘A’ hereto 5. Schedule ‘A’ attached hereto shall form part of this By-law. 6. This By-law shall come into effect on the date of the passing hereof, subject to the provisions of Section 34 of the Planning Act. Passed in Open Council this _____ day of ____________, 20___ __________________________ Adrian Foster, Mayor __________________________ June Gallagher, Municipal Clerk Page 452 This is Schedule “A” to By-law 202X-XXX, passed this day of , 202X A.D. Courtice ● ZBA 202X-XXXX and S-C-202X-XXXX ● Schedule 4 Page 453 Attachment 3 to Report PDS-072-25 Page 454